From: "Amit K. Arora" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7][TAKE5] support new modes in fallocate Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:45:16 +0530 Message-ID: <20070712141516.GC21606@amitarora.in.ibm.com> References: <20070625214626.GJ5181@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070626103247.GA19870@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070630102111.GB23568@infradead.org> <20070630165246.GA5159@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070703100848.GA14936@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070703103107.GA29763@infradead.org> <20070703114650.GB14936@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070711090312.GA18301@infradead.org> <20070712072813.GA31260@in.ibm.com> <20070712131334.GY31489@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Suparna Bhattacharya , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, adilger@clusterfs.com, cmm@us.ibm.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com To: David Chinner Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070712131334.GY31489@sgi.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 11:13:34PM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58:13PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > > > > Why don't we just merge the interface for preallocation (essentially > > enough to satisfy posix_fallocate() and the simple XFS requirement for > > space reservation without changing file size), which there is clear agreement > > on (I hope :)). After all, this was all that we set out to do when we > > started. > > > > And leave all the dealloc/punch/hsm type features for separate future patches/ > > debates, those really shouldn't hold up the basic fallocate interface. > > I agree with Christoph that we are just diverging too much in trying to > > club those decisions here. > > > > Dave, Andreas, Ted ? > > Sure. I'll just make XFS work with whatever it is that gets merged. Great. I will post the new patches soon. -- Regards, Amit Arora