Re: [rfc][patch 3/4] fs: new truncate sequence

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 02:34:12PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 06:47:01AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 08:32:25AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > Thanks for the patch, I think I will fold it in to the series. I
> > > think we probably do need to call simple_setsize in inode_setattr
> > > though (unless you propose to eventually convert every filesystem
> > > to define a .setattr). This would also require eg. your ext2
> > > conversion to strip ATTR_SIZE before passing through to inode_setattr.
> > 
> > Yes, we should eventually make .setattr mandatory.  Doing a default
> > action when a method lacks tends to cause more issues than it solves.
> > 
> > I'm happy to help in doing that part of the conversion (and also other
> > bits)
> 
> OK well here is what I have now for 3/4 and 4/4. Basically just
> folded your patch on top, changed ordering of some checks, have
> fs clear ATTR_SIZE before calling inode_setattr, add a .new_truncate
> field to check against rather than .truncate, and provide a default
> ATTR_SIZE handler in inode_setattr (simple_setsize).

Can we leave that last part out?  Converting those filesystems that do
not have a ->truncate method to a trivial ->setattr is easy, and I can
do it pretty soon (next week probably).

That allows us to get rid of all that ATTR_SIZE clearing which is pretty
ugly.

> +			 *
> +			 * Filesystems which define i_op->new_truncate must
> +			 * handle this themselves. Eventually this will go
> +			 * away because everyone will be converted.

s/define/set/ ?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/