[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] ext2_new_block() behaviour

On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> This predates me by a while, but I suspect that it is done this way on
> the assumption it is easier to seek forward on the disk while reading
> a file rather than seeking backwards. Also, since with new inodes the
> goal is initially the first block of the group where the inode lives,
> the blocks at the start of a group will generally be allocated already,
> so it is usually a waste of time checking the start of the group for
> free blocks.

Umm... OK, the last argument is convincing. Thanks...

BTW, what was the reason behind doing preallocation for directories on
ext2_bread() level? We both buy ourselves an oddity in directory structure
(preallocated blocks become refered from the inode immediately and they
are beyond i_size) and get more complicated ext2_alloc_block(). What do
we win here?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:0.103 / U:0.580 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site