From: Alex Tomas Subject: Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 16:09:20 +0400 Message-ID: <46AC8370.8050308@clusterfs.com> References: <46A8628D.6070103@clusterfs.com> <46A87858.40005@garzik.org> <46A878FC.5040600@clusterfs.com> <46A88DFD.7030609@garzik.org> <46A8A294.2070106@clusterfs.com> <20070727050714.GS12413810@sgi.com> <46A9A41C.7080104@clusterfs.com> <20070729091807.GF31489@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff Garzik , ext4 development , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig To: David Chinner Return-path: Received: from mail.chehov.net ([80.71.245.247]:53853 "EHLO mail.rialcom.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758313AbXG2MJo (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jul 2007 08:09:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070729091807.GF31489@sgi.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org David Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 11:51:56AM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote: > But this is really irrelevant - the issue at hand is what we want > for VFS level delalloc support. IMO, that mechanism needs to support > both XFS and ext4, and I'd prefer if it doesn't perpetuate the > bufferhead abuses of the past (i.e. define an iomap structure > instead of overloading bufferheads yet again). I'm not sure I understand very well. where would you track uptodate, dirty and other states then? do you propose to separate block states from block mapping? thanks, Alex