[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPjX3Feor+wY-_rniWOaGQf_7RPaUQLDZmmjABDkAav8AExaxA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 19:37:01 +0100
From: Daniel Vacek <neelx@...e.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 7/8] open: use super write guard in do_ftruncate()
On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 at 13:16, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
> ---
> fs/open.c | 9 +++------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
> index 3d64372ecc67..1d73a17192da 100644
> --- a/fs/open.c
> +++ b/fs/open.c
> @@ -191,12 +191,9 @@ int do_ftruncate(struct file *file, loff_t length, int small)
> if (error)
> return error;
>
> - sb_start_write(inode->i_sb);
> - error = do_truncate(file_mnt_idmap(file), dentry, length,
> - ATTR_MTIME | ATTR_CTIME, file);
> - sb_end_write(inode->i_sb);
> -
> - return error;
> + scoped_guard(super_write, inode->i_sb)
> + return do_truncate(file_mnt_idmap(file), dentry, length,
> + ATTR_MTIME | ATTR_CTIME, file);
Again, why scoped_guard? It does not make sense, or do I miss something?
--nX
> }
>
> int do_sys_ftruncate(unsigned int fd, loff_t length, int small)
>
> --
> 2.47.3
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists