On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:23:03AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > a) it is consistent with other xfs_io allocation manipulation > command structures such as resvsp/unresvsp These are all different ioctls. > b) "punch" is less to type than "fallocate -p" > c) self documenting in scripts e.g. -c "punch 4k 4k" is much > more obvious than -c "fallocate -p 4k 4k" and saves a man > page lookup when reading the script. > d) punch as a top level command will show up in the "xfs_io > -c help", not require you to know it is a suboption of the > "falloc" command to find out how to use it. > e) the xfs_io command does not have to have the same name > and structure as the underlying API that implements the > functionality the commands execute. I still don't like this as a reason to duplicate the code, and not having the different arguments for fallocate exposed similar to the syscall level. What do you think about introducing a concept of aliases in xfs_io so that we can have a toplevel punch command that just gets aliased to fallocate -p without having to reimplement it? I'd take Josef's older falocate -p implementation and will add the alias support myself. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
