[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] fallocate system call
    On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 10:25:59PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
    > On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:47:02AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
    > > For FA_ALLOCATE, it's supposed to change the file size if we
    > > allocate past EOF, right?
    > I would argue no. Use truncate for that.

    I'm going from the ext4 implementation because the semantics
    have not been documented yet.

    IIRC, the argument for FA_ALLOCATE changing file size is that
    posix_fallocate() is supposed to change the file size. I think
    that having a mode for real preallocation and another for
    posix_fallocate is a valid thing to do...

    Note that the way XFS implements growing the file size after the
    allocation is via a truncate....

    > > For FA_DEALLOCATE, does it change the filesize at all?
    > Same as above.
    > > Or does
    > > it just punch a hole in the file?
    > Yes.

    That's would what I did because otherwise you'd use ftruncate64().
    Without documented behaviour or an ext4 implementation, I have to
    ask what it's supposed to do, though ;)


    Dave Chinner
    Principal Engineer
    SGI Australian Software Group
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-30 07:59    [W:0.035 / U:13.968 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site