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

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

 



On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 02:28:16PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Actually, I wonder if what I want is a kernel_read() that returns ENODATA upon
> encountering a hole at the beginning of the area to be read.

NFS READ_PLUS could also make use of this, but someone needs to actually
implement it.

Until we have that lseek SEEK_HOLE/DATA is the way to go, and the
horrible ->bmap hack needs to die ASAP, I can't believe you managed to
sneak that in in the not too distant past.
--
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