From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] ext4 online defrag (ver 0.2) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 04:33:51 -0700 Message-ID: <20070119113351.GM5236@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <20070116210346sho@rifu.tnes.nec.co.jp> <20070116192134.GB5236@schatzie.adilger.int> <02bb01c73a29$eb846120$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> <015201c73b89$70f521e0$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Joel Becker , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:55862 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965069AbXASLdw (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 06:33:52 -0500 To: Takashi Sato Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <015201c73b89$70f521e0$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Jan 19, 2007 14:19 +0900, Takashi Sato wrote: > >>On Jan 16, 2007 21:03 +0900, sho@tnes.nec.co.jp wrote: > >>>1. Add new ioctl(EXT4_IOC_DEFRAG) which returns the first physical > >>> block number of the specified file. With this ioctl, a command > >>> gets the specified directory's. > >> > >>Maybe I don't understand, but how is this different from the long-time > >>FIBMAP ioctl? > > > >I can use FIBMAP instead of my new ioctl. > >You are right. I should have used FIBMAP ioctl... > > I have to get the physical block number of the specified directory. > But FIBMAP is available only for a regular file, not for a directory. > So I will use my new ioctl. Though it might make sense to implement FIBMAP for a directory, to keep it consistent and allow user-space tools like "filefrag" to work on directories also. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.