From: Alex Tomas Subject: Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:33:08 +0400 Message-ID: <46A8A294.2070106@clusterfs.com> References: <46A8628D.6070103@clusterfs.com> <46A87858.40005@garzik.org> <46A878FC.5040600@clusterfs.com> <46A88DFD.7030609@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ext4 development , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig To: Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from mail.chehov.net ([80.71.245.247]:63976 "EHLO mail.rialcom.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755871AbXGZNdd (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:33:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46A88DFD.7030609@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org It duplicates fs/mpage.c in bio building and introduces new generic API (iomap, map_blocks_t, etc). In contrast, my trivial implementation re-use existing code in fs/mpage.c, doesn't introduce new API and I tend to think provides quite the same functionality. I can be wrong, of course ... thanks, Alex Jeff Garzik wrote: > The XFS one is proven and the work was already completed. > > What were the specific technical issues that made it unsuitable for ext4? > > I would rather not reinvent the wheel, particularly if the reinvention > is less capable than the existing work. > > Jeff > >