From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m9Q4cKlD009025 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:38:20 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 749691480CB4 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id akht3aQt5e9yh3Ex for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4903F439.1070605@sandeen.net> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 23:38:17 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] hook up fiemap & associated formatter References: <49031E81.7040807@sandeen.net> <4903207B.6030009@sandeen.net> <20081025202657.GG28002@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20081025202657.GG28002@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs-oss Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> +#define XFS_FIEMAP_FLAGS (FIEMAP_FLAG_SYNC|FIEMAP_FLAG_XATTR) > > Why do we need FIEMAP_FLAG_SYNC in here? That flag is implemented in > the VFS and should be handled there. (Probably more a question for > the generic implementation than your patch) well, sorta, it calls filemap_write_and_wait but no lock is held to keep that consistent when the filesystem gets to it... IMHO it *should* probably be up to the fs to handle the sync flag. But anyway, for it all to hang together I think we need to tell it that we understand this flag. -Eric >> + >> +STATIC int xfs_fiemap_format( > > STATIC int > xfs_fiemap_format( > > > > Buit the meat of the patch looks good to me. > >