[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] fallocate() implementation in i86, x86_64 and powerpc
    On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 21:31 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
    > I have the updated patches ready which take care of Andrew's comments.
    > Will run some tests and post them soon.
    > But, before submitting these patches, I think it will be better to finalize
    > on certain things which might be worth some discussion here:
    > 1) Should the file size change when preallocation is done beyond EOF ?
    > - Andreas and Chris Wedgwood are in favor of not changing the
    > file size in this case. I also tend to agree with them. Does anyone
    > has an argument in favor of changing the filesize ?
    > If not, I will remove the code which changes the filesize, before I
    > resubmit the concerned ext4 patch.

    If we chose not to update the file size beyong EOF, then for filesystem
    without fallocate() support (ext2,3 currently), posix_fallocate() will
    follow the hard way(zero-out) to do preallocation. Then we will get
    different behavior on filesystems w/o fallocate() support. It make sense
    to be consistent, IMO.

    My point of view, preallocation is just a efficient way to allocating
    blocks for files without zero-out, other than this, the new behavior
    should be consistent with the old way: file size update,mtime/ctime,
    ENOSPC etc.


    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: 2007-05-09 19:11    [W:0.021 / U:6.976 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site