Re: [PATCH v3] fat: editions to support fat_fallocate

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

 



Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> This choose ->release(). BTW, we would also be able to do this only
>> ->evict_inode(), although I'm not thinking yet which one is better.
>>
>> If you had conclusion, it would be nice to explain it.
> evict_inode() will be called only when we unlink the file or if inode
> is evicted from cache.
> As we discussed with you before, We considered preallocated blocks is
> discarded on all close file cases(unlink and muliple openning file).
> So we think it would be better to do this in ->release().

If so, probably, I didn't clear my opinion/suggestion, or misled
you. Sorry about it.

My opinion/suggestion is, "it should be before umount()".
I.e. fallocate() doesn't have any affect to FAT on clean state (clean
umount).

To clear my state, I don't have strong opinion about implementation yet.
For example, about ->release() or ->evict_inode().

So, if you had reason to use ->release() over "we discussed", it would
be good. (Or, if you still didn't have reasons, we would be better to
think about it)

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[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