From: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs-private data in struct block_device
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 23:21:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040101232137.GR4176@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040101151017.3f7bc407.akpm@osdl.org>
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 03:10:17PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> >
> > Al had some critism about a per-blockdev XFS datastructure a while ago
> > and so I tried to follow the suggestion in favour of using struct
> > block_device directly. Unfortunately XFS requires a little bit more
> > information than what's available in struct block_device, in particular
> > whether the blocksize (not sector size) for that devices is identical
> > to the page size, and we can't really get that from elsewhere due to
> > layering constraints.
>
> Why doesn't `if (bdev->bd_block_size == PAGE_SIZE)' work?
>
> Or sb->s_blocksize?
>
> Generally, redundant info like this is a hassle because it has to be kept
> coherent with the thing which it is duplicating.
>
> I suspect I don't understand the problem.
> > Nathan Scott scott suggested turning the bd_invalidated fields into a
> > flags field where the filesystem uses the so far unused flags for it's
> > purposed (similar to struct buffer_head), but I think maybe the variant
> > below that just adds a unsigned long for filesystem usage might be more
> > useful as it also allows storing a pointer if needed. Comments?
Obvious: we need at least some rules regarding who can and who can not
play with that field. IOW, which filesystem?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-01 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-01 16:42 [PATCH] fs-private data in struct block_device Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-01 23:10 ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-01 23:21 ` viro [this message]
2004-01-01 23:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-01 23:28 ` viro
2004-01-01 23:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-04 22:04 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-01-01 23:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-02 2:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-01-02 8:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040101232137.GR4176@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--to=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.