Re: [PATCH/RFC] fscache/cachefiles versus btrfs

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

 



On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 10:23:08AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >  Is there a better way?  Could a better way be created?  Maybe
> >  SEEK_DATA_RELIABLE ??
> 
> fiemap() maybe?

fiemap is not reliable for mapping holes - it returns extent info,
not whether there is data in a range. i.e. there can be data over a
hole (e.g. delayed allocation) and fiemap will return it as a hole.
cp made this mistake back when fiemap was first introduced,
resulting in corrupt file copies.

SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA is what you want, as they are page cache
coherent, not extent based operations. And, really if you need it to
really be able to find real holes, then a superblock flag might be a
better way of marking filesystems with the required capability.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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