From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052826B004D for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:14:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 14:22:50 +0200 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 4/4] fs: tmpfs, ext2 use new truncate Message-ID: <20090708122250.GP2714@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090707144423.GC2714@wotan.suse.de> <20090707144918.GF2714@wotan.suse.de> <20090707163829.GB14947@infradead.org> <20090708065327.GM2714@wotan.suse.de> <20090708111420.GB20924@duck.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090708111420.GB20924@duck.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Jan Kara Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 01:14:20PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 08-07-09 08:53:27, Nick Piggin wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 12:38:29PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > We can't move this to the caller easily. ext2_delete_inode gets > > > called for all inodes, but we only want to go on truncating for the > > > limited set that passes this check. > > > > Hmm, shouldn't they have no ->i_blocks in that case? > Not necessarily. Inode can have extended attributes set and those can > be stored in a special block which is accounted in i_blocks. OK fair enough. But I don't know if all those checks are realy appropriate. For example an IS_APPEND inode should be able to have its blocks trimmed off if a write fails. -- 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