On 2011-03-30 19:33, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 07:11:47PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote: >> Makes sense. This could also be done by adding a respective flags argument >> to fallocate and have a common wrapper function look at the file descriptor >> and call the fs fallocate, that could then get the inode rather the file. >> In other words, why copy code rather than factor it out into a common >> function? > We can discuss that _iff_ a valid use for a file-less fallocate appears > in mainline. The pnfs-block one is not. It's just a racy hack, which > opens gapping holes. Take a look what it does - it allocates block for > a client to write into directly, with absolutely zero guarantee the > block allocation actually stays around until that point. > > You'll need to have some outstanding token on extent map changes like > done in CXFS or NEC's "gfs" which implemented something similar to pnfs > based on nfsv3. Agreed. Benny > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
