Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755298AbXFLHLV (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:11:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751127AbXFLHLJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:11:09 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:44335 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750775AbXFLHLG (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:11:06 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:46:52 +0530 From: "Amit K. Arora" To: David Chinner Cc: Suparna Bhattacharya , 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: <20070612061652.GA6320@amitarora.in.ibm.com> References: <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> <20070512080157.GF85884050@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070512080157.GF85884050@sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2252 Lines: 56 On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 06:01:57PM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > 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... Hi Dave, Did you get time to write the above man page ? It will help to push further patches in time (eg. for FA_PREALLOCATE mode). The idea I had was to push the patch with bare minimum functionality (FA_ALLOCATE and FA_DEALLOCATE modes) and parallely finalize on other new mode(s) based on the man page you planned to provide. Thanks! -- Regards, Amit Arora > > 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/