Re: [PATCH 3/3] block: implement (some of) fallocate for block devices

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

 



On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 07:06:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > +       if ((mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE) &&
> > +           (!blk_queue_discard(q) || !q->limits.discard_zeroes_data))
> > +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 
> I'm ok with this, but suspect that some users would prefer to just
> turn this into ZERO_RANGE silently.
> 
> Comments from people who would be expected to use this?

A hole punch should be a hole punch, and not silently allocate blocks
isntead of deallocating them.  It's not even a fallback, it's pretty
much the opposite for some workloads.
--
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