Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:13:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:13:22 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:2317 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:13:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:12:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Andrew Morton cc: Andreas Dilger , Alexander Viro , Subject: Re: [prepatch] address_space-based writeback In-Reply-To: <3CB612EF.A20AA3C9@zip.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: > > One problem with having a bitmap at page->private is that > we don't know how big the blocks are. You could have > 0x00000003 but you don't know if that's two 1k blocks > or two 2k blocks. Not hard to work around I guess. I think the more fundamental problem is that we want to have a generic mechanism, and for other filesystems the writeback data is a lot different from "this sector is dirty". That, in the end, convinced me that there's no point to trying to keep per-sector dirty data around in a generic formal - it just wasn't generic enough. So now it's up to the writeback mechanism itself to keep track of which part of the page is dirty, be it with the NFS kind of "nfs_page" structures, or with things like "struct buffer_head", and I certainly no longer have any plans at all to try to keep anything like a "dirty bitmap" in the generic data structures. Linus - 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/