From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] - revert generic_fillattr stat->blksize to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 17:08:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20061107000840.GF6012@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <454FAE0A.3070409@redhat.com> <20061106230547.GA29711@infradead.org> <454FC20F.8040206@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:14215 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753855AbWKGAIm (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Nov 2006 19:08:42 -0500 To: Eric Sandeen Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <454FC20F.8040206@redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Nov 06, 2006 17:15 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I agree with the conclusion, but the patch is incomplete. You went down > > all the way to find out what the fileystems do in this messages, so add > > the hunks to override the defaults for non-standard filesystems to the > > patch aswell to restore the pre-inode diet state. > > Well, agreed. I put 80% or more back to pre-patch state, but not all. > :) So it's less broken with my patch than without, so at least it's > moving forward. So... Ted's patches get in w/o fixing up all the other > filesystems (left as an exercise to the patch reader) but mine can't? :) Actually, rather than blindly revert to pre-patch behaviour it would be worthwhile to determine if PAGE_SIZE isn't the better value. In some cases people don't understand that i_blksize is the "optimal IO size" and instead assume it is the filesystem blocksize. I saw a few that were e.g. 512 and that can't be very useful. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc.