On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 10:03:12AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 05:16:50PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
Well, if you see the modes proposed using above flags :
#define FA_ALLOCATE 0
#define FA_DEALLOCATE FA_FL_DEALLOC
#define FA_RESV_SPACE
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58:13PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 10:03:12AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 05:16:50PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
Well, if you see the modes proposed using above flags :
#define FA_ALLOCATE 0
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:19:38PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jul 11, 2007 17:20 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
If you use a normal pseudo random number generator and print the seed
(e.g. create from the time) initially the image can be easily recreated
later without shipping it around.
The next version of checkpatch.pl (0.08) should have support for a
number of the missed sylistics you mention. Will let them soak for a
bit to ensure we're not majorly regressing anything else.
-apw
ERROR: braces {} are not necessary for single statements
#4: FILE: Z11.c:1:
+if
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:36:22 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
with the patch all headers are checked. the code should become
more resistant to on-disk corruptions. needless BUG_ON() have
been removed. please, review for inclusion.
...
@@ -269,6 +239,70
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 16:32 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:38:01 -0400
Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is on top of the nanosecond timestamp and i_version_hi
patches.
This sort of information isn't needed (or desired) when this patch hits the
git
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:58:13PM +0530, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote:
Why don't we just merge the interface for preallocation (essentially
enough to satisfy posix_fallocate() and the simple XFS requirement for
space reservation without changing file size), which there is clear agreement
on
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:14:25 -0400
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:04AM -0500, Jose R. Santos wrote:
Right now what I've done is allocate the bitmaps and inode tables at the
beginning of each group of 64 BG. Still need to work on fsck since just
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:57:51 -0500 Dave Kleikamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 12:38 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
+if (ext4_ext_check_header(inode,
ext_block_hdr(bh),
+
