From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1946319AbWBDGad (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Feb 2006 01:30:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1946318AbWBDGad (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Feb 2006 01:30:33 -0500 Received: from mx1.mail.ru ([194.67.23.121]:25671 "EHLO mx1.mail.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1946316AbWBDGac (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Feb 2006 01:30:32 -0500 Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:18:48 +0300 From: Evgeniy Dushistov To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ufs: fill i_size at directory creation Message-ID: <20060204061848.GA11894@rain.homenetwork> Mail-Followup-To: Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060131234634.GA13773@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru> <20060201200410.GA11747@rain.homenetwork> <20060203174613.GA7823@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru> <20060204011815.GA7837@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060204011815.GA7837@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 04:18:15AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > How about this as a first small step? > + inode->i_size = UFS_SB(sb)->s_uspi->s_fsize; It looks very strange for me. During "fill super" we set block size of device to fragment size, so sb->s_blocksize and UFS_SB(sb)->s_uspi->s_fsize should be the same size on your system: 2048, hence question: what difference between your and my patch? -- /Evgeniy