From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CABB7F91 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 09:19:16 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <556F0CE0.8080402@sgi.com> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:19:12 -0500 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC v2] xfs: byte range buffer dirty region tracking References: <1432865777-14616-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> In-Reply-To: <1432865777-14616-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 05/28/15 21:16, Dave Chinner wrote: > Discussion: > > I think that we will eventually need to track multiple regions - 3 > is probably sufficient - because the nature of directory operations > are that just about every operation modifies a header in the buffer, > a tail section in the buffer and then some number of bytes/regions > in the middle of the buffer. Nod to the idea. What made you change from your original idea of using 4 regions to 3 regions? --Mark. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs