Re: [PATCH 0/6] first step toward the new truncate sequence

[Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>]

On 05/31/2010 12:50 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 05/30/2010 11:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> This series is something that I see as the first major step towards
>> a broad switch to the new truncate sequence.  The patches get rid
>> of the _newtrunc variant of blockdev_direct_IO & friends and
>> *_write_begin, and clean up some bits in that area that make the
>> switch easier.  After this we have all vmtruncate instances except
>> for inode_setattr in filesystem code.  A second series to deal
>> with ->setattr will follow and after that we can easily switch
>> over one filesystem after another.
>>
>> I think this is still 2.6.34 material as it will make the fs
>> switches a lot easier and avoid introducing the _newtrunc variants
>> for one kernel release.
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
> Christoph, Nick hi.
> 
> I'm attempting a truncate conversion for exofs, will need a review.
> 
> I'm basing the first attempt on Al's next tree that has Nicks last
> patches. Will rebase on these when they get into that tree. Please
> advise on the best tree to use?
> (BTW did you mean 2.6.35 above, I guess)
> 
> So one minor thing ext2_setsize can be static: 
> (It used to be used by the struct inode_operations)
> 

One more thing. ext2_setsize is only used by ext2_setattr do we still
need this code? (form ext2_setsize) half of it is done in ext2_setattr
already)

	inode->i_mtime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
	if (inode_needs_sync(inode)) {
		sync_mapping_buffers(inode->i_mapping);
		ext2_sync_inode (inode);
	} else {
		mark_inode_dirty(inode);
	}

And generic_setattr does some more of that, No?

Boaz