[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2b55d220703131640p47f441cdk6f213e64eb78f2e3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:40:41 -0700
From: "Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>
To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
"Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
7eggert@....de, dada1@...mosbay.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sys_write() racy for multi-threaded append?
On 3/13/07, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> Michael, please stop spreading this utter bullshit _now_. You're so
> full of half-knowledge that it's not funny anymore, and you try
> to insult people knowing a few magniutes more than you left and right.
Thank you Christoph for that informative response to my comments. I
take it that you consider read_write.c to be code of the highest
quality and maintainability. If you have something specific in mind
when you write "utter bullshit" and "half-knowledge", I'd love to hear
it.
Now, for those who still care to respond as if improving the kernel
were a goal that you and I can share, a question: When
generic_file_llseek needs the inode in order to retrieve the current
file size, it goes through f_mapping (the pagecache entry?) rather
than through f_path.dentry (the dentry cache?). All other inode
retrievals in read_write.c go through f_path.dentry. Why? Or is this
a question that can only be asked on linux-fsdevel?
Cheers,
- Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists