Messages in this thread |  | | From | (Linus Torvalds) | Subject | Re: [prepatch] address_space-based writeback | Date | Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:20:04 +0000 (UTC) |
| |
In article <5.1.0.14.2.20020410235415.03d41d00@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk>, Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > >Um, NTFS uses address spaces for things where ->host is not an inode at all >so doing host->i_sb will give you god knows what but certainly not a super >block!
Then that should be fixed in NTFS.
The original meaning of "->host" was that it could be anything (and it was a "void *", but the fact is that all the generic VM code etc needed to know about host things like size, locking etc, so for over a year now "host" has been a "struct inode", and if you need to have something else, then that something else has to embed a proper inode.
>As long as your patches don't break that is possible to have I am happy... >But from what you are saying above I have a bad feeling you are somehow >assuming that a mapping's host is an inode...
It's not Andrew who is assuming anything: it _is_. Look at <linux/fs.h>, and notice the
struct inode *host;
part.
Linus - 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/
|  |