From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752381AbXDIQjA (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 12:39:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751917AbXDIQjA (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 12:39:00 -0400 Received: from lazybastard.de ([212.112.238.170]:60055 "EHLO longford.lazybastard.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751975AbXDIQi6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 12:38:58 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 18:34:37 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel To: Paul Mackerras Cc: Heiko Carstens , Andrew Morton , "Amit K. Arora" , torvalds@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 Subject: Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call Message-ID: <20070409163436.GA24012@lazybastard.org> References: <20070316143101.GA10152@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070316161704.GE8525@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <20070317111036.GC29931@parisc-linux.org> <20070321120425.GA27273@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070329115126.GB7374@amitarora.in.ibm.com> <20070329101010.7a2b8783.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070330071929.GC8365@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <17932.54606.323431.491736@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20070330104449.GA9371@lazybastard.org> <17946.14646.808334.441833@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <17946.14646.808334.441833@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 9 April 2007 23:01:42 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Jörn Engel writes: > > > Wouldn't that work be confined to fallocate()? If I understand Heiko > > correctly, the alternative would slow s390 down for every syscall, > > including more performance-critical ones. > > The alternative that Jakub suggested wouldn't slow s390 down. True. And it appears to be one of the least offensive options we have. Jörn -- My second remark is that our intellectual powers are rather geared to master static relations and that our powers to visualize processes evolving in time are relatively poorly developed. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra