Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fat: mark superblock as dirty less often

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 19:37 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> > But could you please explain why do we need an extra variable? What is
> > the problem with doing all our FAT table changes and then marking the
> > FSINFO as dirty?
> 
> Above example may not be proper. I meant please dirty FSINFO only if
> necessary. Your patch seems to be dirty even if code didn't change
> FSINFO.

Ah, yes, in 'fat_alloc_clusters()' indeed, thanks, I'll fix this.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux