From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6][TAKE5] fallocate system call Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:34:25 -0400 Message-ID: <20070628203425.GB5789@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <20070511110301.GB28425@in.ibm.com> <20070512080157.GF85884050@sgi.com> <20070612061652.GA6320@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070613235217.GS86004887@sgi.com> <20070614091458.GH5181@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070614120413.GD86004887@sgi.com> <20070614193347.GN5181@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070625132810.GA1951@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070628025543.9467216f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070628175757.GA1674@amitarora.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, David Chinner , suparna@in.ibm.com, cmm@us.ibm.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com To: "Amit K. Arora" Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:48906 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757192AbXF1Ue1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:34:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070628175757.GA1674@amitarora.in.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Jun 28, 2007 23:27 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:55:43AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Are we all supposed to re-review the entire patchset (or at least #4 and > > #7) again? > > As I mentioned in the note above, only patches #4 and #7 were new and > thus these needed to be reviewed. Other patches are _not_ replacements > of any of the patches which are already part of -mm and/or in Ted's > patch queue. They were posted again as just "placeholders" so that the > two new patches (#4 & #7) could be reviewed. Sorry for any confusion. The new patches are definitely a big improvement over the previous API, and need to go in before fallocate() goes into mainline. This last set of changes allows the behaviour of these syscalls to accomodate the various different semantics desired by XFS in a sensible manner instead of tying all of the individual behaviours (time update, size update, alloc/free, etc) into monolithic modes that will never make everyone happy. My understanding is that you only need to grab #4 and #7 to get your tree into get fallocate in sync with the ext4 patch queue (i.e. they are incremental over the previous set). Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.