From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC] basic delayed allocation in VFS Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:22:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20070729192241.GA14530@infradead.org> References: <46A8628D.6070103@clusterfs.com> <46A87858.40005@garzik.org> <20070728195114.GA5952@infradead.org> <20070729173035.GU5992@schatzie.adilger.int> <46ACD2DA.20101@clusterfs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jeff Garzik , ext4 development , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Alex Tomas Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:49444 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765514AbXG2TWu (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:22:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46ACD2DA.20101@clusterfs.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 09:48:10PM +0400, Alex Tomas wrote: > I think the latter one is better because it supports bs < pagesize > (though I'm not sure about data=ordered yet). I'm not against putting > most of the patch into fs/ext4/, but at least few bits to be changed > in fs/ - exports in fs/mpage.c and one "if" in __block_write_full_page(). The changes to __block_write_full_page is obviously fine, and exporting mpage.c bits sounds fine to me aswell, although I'd like to take a look at the final patch.