[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <07537871-ab4e-4629-86ff-5559aa88ad17@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:58:46 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
kbusch@...nel.org, hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me, jejb@...ux.ibm.com,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, djwong@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
brauner@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, jbongio@...gle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com, linux-aio@...ck.org,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
nilay@...ux.ibm.com,
Prasad Singamsetty <prasad.singamsetty@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] fs: Initial atomic write support
On 24/02/2024 18:20, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
>>> Helper function atomic_write_valid() can be used by FSes to verify
>>> compliant writes.
> Minor nit.
> maybe generic_atomic_write_valid()?
Having "generic" in the name implies that there are other ways in which
we can check if an atomic write is valid, but really this function
should be good to use in scenarios so far considered.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists