From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from longford.lazybastard.org (lazybastard.de [212.112.238.170]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l3RElgfB027622 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:47:43 -0700 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:43:28 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] fallocate system call Message-ID: <20070427144327.GC22949@lazybastard.org> References: <20070329115126.GB7374@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070329101010.7a2b8783.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070330071417.GI355@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20070417125514.GA7574@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070418130600.GW5967@schatzie.adilger.int> <20070420135146.GA21352@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070420145918.GY355@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20070424121632.GA10136@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070426175056.GA25321@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070427121003.GA7808@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20070427121003.GA7808@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Heiko Carstens Cc: "Amit K. Arora" , torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, suparna@in.ibm.com, cmm@us.ibm.com On Fri, 27 April 2007 14:10:03 +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > After long discussions where at least two possible implementations > were suggested that would work on _all_ architectures you chose one > which doesn't and causes extra effort. I believe the long discussion also showed that every possible implementation has drawbacks. To me this one appeared to be the best of many bad choices. Is this implementation worse than we thought? Jörn -- The grand essentials of happiness are: something to do, something to love, and something to hope for. -- Allan K. Chalmers