Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 12:55:51AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > It may be beneficial to implement a smarter jfs_get_blocks() in > > that case. The one I put there is just a degenerate version to > > keep direct-IO happy. But if you change it to map more disk, > > it will be called less often during direct IO. > > > > It's pretty simple - it's passed the number of blocks to attempt > > to map, and it returns the amount of contiguous disk which it _did_ > > map in bh->b_size. > > It's already in the tree.
Ah. Does it help much? > Btw, is there any chance to make ->readpages > and ->writepages take a get_blocks callback? This would help extent > based filesystems. That's the plan. Redo those functions to understand more than a single block, and migrate all get_block() instances to get_blocks(). I can't say that it's particularly high-priority though, unless someone waves a "this sucks" profile at me ;) _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
