On Thu 24-08-17 06:38:09, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 02:34:51PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > In a subtle but important way ;). The main difference is that if the extent
> > has been already allocated by previous write, but the changing transaction
> > is not yet committed, we will return IOMAP_F_NEEDDSYNC but not IOMAP_F_NEW.
>
> Ok. How about a IOMAP_F_DIRTY flag and a better explanation?
OK, will change it.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
