[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGudoHEqDaY3=KuV9CuPja8UgVBhiZVZ7ej5r1yoSxRZaMnknA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:05:29 +0100
From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Hao-ran Zheng <zhenghaoran@...a.edu.cn>, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
baijiaju1990@...il.com, 21371365@...a.edu.cn
Subject: Re: [RFC] metadata updates vs. fetches (was Re: [PATCH v4] fs: Fix
data race in inode_set_ctime_to_ts)
On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 11:10 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> So I mention the "rename and extend i_size_seqcount" as a solution
> that I suspect might be acceptable if somebody has the motivation and
> energy, but honestly I also think "nobody can be bothered" is
> acceptable in practice.
>
So happens recently the metadata ordeal also came up around getattr
where a submitter wanted to lock the inode around it.
Looks like this is a recurring topic?
Until the day comes when someone has way too much time on their hands
and patches it up (even that may encounter resistance though), I do
think it would make sense to nicely write it down somewhere so for
easy reference -- maybe as a comment above getattr and note around
other places like the timespec helpers to read that.
--
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists