[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegsJijCeNZ9ES72e=gDNDisK5itG67GK8xNWRar=HMm6gA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:16:11 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@....com>
Cc: Dharmendra Singh <dharamhans87@...il.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
fuse-devel <fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/3] FUSE: Implement atomic lookup + open/create
On Thu, 19 May 2022 at 19:42, Bernd Schubert <bschubert@....com> wrote:
> Can you help me a bit to understand what we should change? I had also
> already thought to merge CREATE_EXT and OPEN_ATOMIC - so agreed.
> Shall we make the other cases more visible?
Make it clear in the code flow if we are using the new request or the
old; e.g. rename current fuse_atomic_open() to fuse_open_nonatomic()
and do
static int fuse_open_atomic(...)
{
...
args.opcode = FUSE_OPEN_ATOMIC;
...
err = fuse_simple_request(...);
if (err == -ENOSYS)
goto fallback;
...
fallback:
return fuse_open_nonatomic();
}
static int fuse_atomic_open(...)
{
if (fc->no_open_atomic)
return fuse_open_nonatomic();
else
return fuse_open_atomic();
}
Also we can tweak fuse_dentry_revalidate() so it always invalidates
negative dentries if the new atomic open is available, and possibly
for positive dentries as well, if the rfc patch makes it.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists