linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] fuse: close file synchronously

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJfpegvJGBuOpYi=W3rzzu4Jwa46e_9SxDC4fa-PPmCQs2K3rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Apr 2013 22:53:18 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@...allels.com>
Cc:	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...allels.com>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	fuse-devel <fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Brian Foster <bfoster@...hat.com>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	devel@...nvz.org, Anand Avati <anand.avati@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] fuse: close file synchronously

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
> Let's approach it from the other direction:  what if you give back the
> write lease on the first flush?  It will probably work fine for 99% of
> cases, since no other writes are going to happen after the first
> flush.  For the remaining cases you'll just have to reacquire the
> lease when a write happens after the flush.  I guess performance-wise
> that will not be an issue, but I may be wrong.

What about this?

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/