Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:16:23 -0700 | From | Mike Waychison <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/6][RFC] Cleanup FIBMAP |
| |
Chris Mason wrote: > On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 18:57:06 +0100 > Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> ->bmap is ugly and horrible! If you have to do this at the very >> least please cause ->bmap64 to be able to return error values in case >> the file system failed to get the information or indeed such >> information does not exist as is the case for compressed and >> encrypted files for example and also for small files that are inside >> the on-disk inode (NTFS resident files and reiserfs packed tails are >> examples of this). >> >> And another of my pet peeves with ->bmap is that it uses 0 to mean >> "sparse" which causes a conflict on NTFS at least as block zero is >> part of the $Boot system file so it is a real, valid block... NTFS >> uses -1 to denote sparse blocks internally. > > Reiserfs and Btrfs also use 0 to mean packed. It would be nice if there > was a way to indicate your-data-is-here-but-isn't-alone. But that's > more of a feature for the FIEMAP stuff. >
I hadn't heard of FIEMAP, so I went back and read the thread from April/May. It seems that this is a much better approach than introducing a FIBMAP64.
What ever happened with this proposal?
Mike Waychison - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |