From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932317AbWGDWSl (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 18:18:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932318AbWGDWSl (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 18:18:41 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:16084 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932317AbWGDWSk (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 18:18:40 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 15:18:32 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Hans Reiser Cc: hch@infradead.org, vs@namesys.com, Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] batch-write.patch Message-Id: <20060704151832.9f2d87b3.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <44AAA8ED.5030906@namesys.com> References: <44A42750.5020807@namesys.com> <20060629185017.8866f95e.akpm@osdl.org> <1152011576.6454.36.camel@tribesman.namesys.com> <20060704114836.GA1344@infradead.org> <44AAA8ED.5030906@namesys.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:44:13 -0700 Hans Reiser wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > >On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 03:12:56PM +0400, Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote: > > > > > >>>Should this be an address_space_operation or a file_operation? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>I was seeking to be minimal in my changes to the philosophy of the code. > >>So, it was an address_space operation. Now it is a file operation. > >> > >> > > > >It definitly should not be a file_operation! It works at the address_space > >not the much higher file level. Maybe all three should become callbacks > >for the generic write routines, but that's left for the future. > > > > > > > > > I don't have a commitment to one way or the other, probably because > there are some things that are unclear in my mind. Could you help me > with them? Can you define what is the address space vs. the file level > please? It is odd to be asking such a basic question, but these things > are genuinely unclear to me. If the use of something varies according > to the file, is it a file method? What things vary according to address > space and not according to file? Should things that vary according to > address space be address space ops and things that vary according to > file be file ops? If that logic seems valid, should a lot more be changed? > > Oh, and Andrew, while such things are discussed, could you just pick one > way or the other and let the patch go in? > I wasn't sure, which was I asked rather than suggested.. Looking closer, yes I agree with Christoph, sorry. It's called at the same level as ->prepare_write/commit_write so if there's any logic to this, it's logical that batched_write be an a_op too.