Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] pass open file to ->setattr()

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <7eggert@...>
Cc: <bfields@...>, <linux-fsdevel@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <viro@...>, <hch@...>
Date: Friday, August 10, 2007 - 1:40 am

> >> > This is needed to be able to correctly implement open-unlink-fsetattr

Yes, but open files and in-progress requests are lost at reconnect.


Sure.  Obviously one of the drawbacks of a stateful protocol is that
the server state can't survive a reconnect.

But that sort of reliability has never been the goal of sshfs.  And
even if that was needed, it could probably be much better handled in a
lower layer.

Miklos
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] pass open file to -&gt;setattr(), Bodo Eggert, (Thu Aug 9, 5:52 pm)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] pass open file to ->setattr(), Miklos Szeredi, (Fri Aug 10, 1:40 am)