From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d28relay04.in.ibm.com (d28relay04.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.61]) by e28smtp06.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m3U7lmQo008181 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:17:48 +0530 Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (d28av03.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.65]) by d28relay04.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m3U7lfqs1355818 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:17:42 +0530 Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av03.in.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m3U7llNM024142 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:47:47 GMT Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:17:38 +0530 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: correct use of vmtruncate()? Message-ID: <20080430074738.GC7791@skywalker> References: <20080429100601.GO108924158@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080429100601.GO108924158@sgi.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: David Chinner Cc: linux-fsdevel , linux-mm , xfs-oss List-ID: On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 08:06:01PM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > Folks, > > It appears to me that vmtruncate() is not used correctly in > block_write_begin() and friends. The short summary is that it > appears that the usage in these functions implies that vmtruncate() > should cause truncation of blocks on disk but no filesystem > appears to do this, nor does the documentation imply they should. Looking at ext*_truncate, I see we are freeing blocks as a part of vmtruncate. Or did I miss something ? -aneesh -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org