Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 2 Jan 2001 22:37:50 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [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? Cheers, Al
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |