Re: [PATCH 0/1][RFC] mm: prepare_write positive return value

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 11:33:46 +0300
Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru> wrote:

> Almost all read/write operation handles data with chunks(segments or pages)
> and result has integral behaviour for folowing scenario: 
> for_each_chunk() {
>      res = op(....);
>      if(IS_ERROR(res))
>            return progress ? progress : res;
>      progress += res;
> }
> prepare_write may has integral behaviour in case of blksize < pgsize,
> for example we successfully allocated/read some blocks, but not all of them,
> and than some error happend. Currently we eliminate this progress by doing
> vmtrunate() after prepare_has failed.
> It is good to have ability to signal about this progress. Interprete positive
> prepare_write() ret code as bytes num that fs ready to handle at this moment.
> I've ask SAW, he think it is sane. This size always less than PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
> so it less than AOP_TRUNCATED_PAGE too.
>  
> BTH: This approach was used in OpenVZ 2.6.9 kernel in order to make FS with 
> delayed allocation more correct, and its works well.
> I think not everybody will happy about this,  but let's discuss all advantages
> and disadvantages of this change.

That seems to be a logical change.  We'd need to review all the callers and
callees to make sure that they handle this change correctly.

Your changes deviate quite a lot from standard kernel coding style.  Please fix
that.

Please cc linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org on the next version of these patches.  I'm
seriously running out of bandwidth over here and ext4 has other maintainers.

Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/