![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread
|
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 01:31:52AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Merge > > fallocate-implementation-on-i86-x86_64-and-powerpc.patch Andrew, Could you replace the comment/header section of fallocate-implementation-on-i86-x86_64-and-powerpc.patch with the following (attached below) ? This is from the ext4 patches, where Amit had cleaned up description, which will make for a cleaner and easier to understand submission into the git tree. I've reviewed the other fallocate patches, noting the request to drop the s390 patches since Martin has said he will wire up it up after this hits mainline, and the only other change that I've found between what we have in the ext4 tree and -mm is that we have fallocate-on-ia64.patch and fallocate-on-ia64-fix.patch merged into a single patch. It probably would be better to merge them before sending it off to Linus, in the interests of cleanliness and making the tree more git-bisect friendly. Regards, - Ted From: Amit Arora <aarora@in.ibm.com> sys_fallocate() implementation on i386, x86_64 and powerpc fallocate() is a new system call being proposed here which will allow applications to preallocate space to any file(s) in a file system. Each file system implementation that wants to use this feature will need to support an inode operation called ->fallocate(). Applications can use this feature to avoid fragmentation to certain level and thus get faster access speed. With preallocation, applications also get a guarantee of space for particular file(s) - even if later the the system becomes full. Currently, glibc provides an interface called posix_fallocate() which can be used for similar cause. Though this has the advantage of working on all file systems, but it is quite slow (since it writes zeroes to each block that has to be preallocated). Without a doubt, file systems can do this more efficiently within the kernel, by implementing the proposed fallocate() system call. It is expected that posix_fallocate() will be modified to call this new system call first and incase the kernel/filesystem does not implement it, it should fall back to the current implementation of writing zeroes to the new blocks. ToDos: 1. Implementation on other architectures (other than i386, x86_64, ppc64 and s390(x)). David Chinner has already posted a patch for ia64. 2. A generic file system operation to handle fallocate (generic_fallocate), for filesystems that do _not_ have the fallocate inode operation implemented. 3. Changes to glibc, a) to support fallocate() system call b) to make posix_fallocate() and posix_fallocate64() call fallocate() Signed-off-by: Amit Arora <aarora@in.ibm.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-07-10 13:55 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||