Re: [PATCH v3] fat: editions to support fat_fallocate

[OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>]

Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@gmail.com> writes:

>> This choose ->release(). BTW, we would also be able to do this only
>> ->evict_inode(), although I'm not thinking yet which one is better.
>>
>> If you had conclusion, it would be nice to explain it.
> evict_inode() will be called only when we unlink the file or if inode
> is evicted from cache.
> As we discussed with you before, We considered preallocated blocks is
> discarded on all close file cases(unlink and muliple openning file).
> So we think it would be better to do this in ->release().

If so, probably, I didn't clear my opinion/suggestion, or misled
you. Sorry about it.

My opinion/suggestion is, "it should be before umount()".
I.e. fallocate() doesn't have any affect to FAT on clean state (clean
umount).

To clear my state, I don't have strong opinion about implementation yet.
For example, about ->release() or ->evict_inode().

So, if you had reason to use ->release() over "we discussed", it would
be good. (Or, if you still didn't have reasons, we would be better to
think about it)

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>