Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751702Ab2K2EWM (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:22:12 -0500 Received: from mail-qc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:36200 "EHLO mail-qc0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750699Ab2K2EWK (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:22:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:22:09 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Dave Chinner cc: Andrew Morton , "Theodore Ts'o" , Zheng Liu , Jeff liu , Jim Meyering , Paul Eggert , Christoph Hellwig , Josef Bacik , Andi Kleen , Andreas Dilger , Marco Stornelli , Chris Mason , Sunil Mushran , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: support SEEK_DATA and SEEK_HOLE (reprise) In-Reply-To: <20121129024446.GY6434@dastard> Message-ID: References: <20121129024446.GY6434@dastard> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1527 Lines: 34 On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 05:22:03PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > Revert 3.5's f21f8062201f ("tmpfs: revert SEEK_DATA and SEEK_HOLE") > > to reinstate 4fb5ef089b28 ("tmpfs: support SEEK_DATA and SEEK_HOLE"), > > with the intervening additional arg to generic_file_llseek_size(). > > > > In 3.8, ext4 is expected to join btrfs, ocfs2 and xfs with proper > > SEEK_DATA and SEEK_HOLE support; and a good case has now been made > > for it on tmpfs, so let's join the party. > > > > It's quite easy for tmpfs to scan the radix_tree to support llseek's new > > SEEK_DATA and SEEK_HOLE options: so add them while the minutiae are still > > on my mind (in particular, the !PageUptodate-ness of pages fallocated but > > still unwritten). > > > > [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix warning with CONFIG_TMPFS=n] > > Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins > > --- > > Does it pass the seek hole/data tests (285, 286) in xfstests? It did before and ... [install this, install that, install tother] ... yes, it still passes those tests - using Boris Ranto's patch extending xfstests to include tmpfs. Though I'd have even more confidence if they gave a little pat on the back for doing better than the no-op default, which also passes. Hugh -- 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/