Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758055AbXELICj (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 May 2007 04:02:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754940AbXELICZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 May 2007 04:02:25 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:33732 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754370AbXELICW (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 May 2007 04:02:22 -0400 Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 18:01:57 +1000 From: David Chinner To: Suparna Bhattacharya Cc: David Chinner , "Amit K. Arora" , torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, cmm@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] fallocate() implementation in i86, x86_64 and powerpc Message-ID: <20070512080157.GF85884050@sgi.com> References: <20070420135146.GA21352@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070420145918.GY355@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20070424121632.GA10136@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070426175056.GA25321@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070426180332.GA7209@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070509160102.GA30745@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070510005926.GT85884050@sgi.com> <20070510115620.GB21400@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070510223950.GD86004887@sgi.com> <20070511110301.GB28425@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070511110301.GB28425@in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1754 Lines: 40 On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:33:01PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 08:39:50AM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > > All I'm really interested in right now is that the fallocate > > _interface_ can be used as a *complete replacement* for the > > pre-existing XFS-specific ioctls that are already used by > > applications. What ext4 can or can't do right now is irrelevant to > > this discussion - the interface definition needs to take priority > > over implementation.... > > Would you like to write up an interface definition description (likely > man page) and post it for review, possibly with a mention of apps using > it today ? Yeah, I started doing that yesterday as i figured it was the only way to cut the discussion short.... > One reason for introducing the mode parameter was to allow the interface to > evolve incrementally as more options / semantic questions are proposed, so > that we don't have to make all the decisions right now. > So it would be good to start with a *minimal* definition, even just one mode. > The rest could follow as subsequent patches, each being reviewed and debated > separately. Otherwise this discussion can drag on for a long time. Minimal definition to replace what applicaitons use on XFS and to support poasix_fallocate are the thre that have been mentioned so far (FA_ALLOCATE, FA_PREALLOCATE, FA_DEALLOCATE). I'll document them all in a man page... Cheers, Dave. -- 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 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/