From: Theodore Tso Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] ext4: Use inode preallocation with -o noextents Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:37:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20080605153701.GB25477@mit.edu> References: <1211229262-11012-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080604022356.GA7094@mit.edu> <20080604040101.GA22348@skywalker> <20080605032220.GC10488@mit.edu> <20080605084329.GB8942@skywalker> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, sandeen@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Return-path: Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.ORG ([69.25.196.31]:35251 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752928AbYFEPh6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:37:58 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080605084329.GB8942@skywalker> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 02:13:29PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > Something like below ? . I will send a final patch once I get the > patchqueu updated. I am not able to reach repo.or.cz currently. This is better, but it still means that we are exporting a large number of functions to the callers. It's not clear to me we need so many different variants of ext4_new_blocks_* --- what is their justification to exist? For example, why not just have: static ext4_fsblk_t ext4_new_blocks(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode, ext4_lblk_t iblock, ext4_fsblk_t goal, unsigned long *count, int *errp, int meta) where if inode is NULL, then you're allocating a metadata block, and if count is NULL, then you only want one block. Of course, this needs to be carefully documented at the function. - Ted