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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox