From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fiemap, an extent mapping ioctl Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:20:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20080910162040.GA17482@infradead.org> References: <20080825202250.GY3392@webber.adilger.int> <20080910124005.GA4563@wotan.suse.de> <20080910124934.GB4563@wotan.suse.de> <20080910134727.GA17498@infradead.org> <20080910161037.GH4563@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Andreas Dilger , Eric Sandeen , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Fasheh Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:41498 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751901AbYIJQUr (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:20:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080910161037.GH4563@wotan.suse.de> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 09:10:37AM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote: > Ok, aside from NO_BYPASS all your proposed changes have been made. Not sure > about NO_BYPASS. Maybe we just update the description? In the meantime, can > we please just put this in -mm? I'll happily do a patch on top of it all to > rename EXTENT_NO_BYPASS once we agree on a name. AFAICS it's meant to say "not a filesystem block but something else", so we should say that in the flag. Otherwise this one looks good to me.