On Wed 23-01-08 19:13:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote:I'm fine with that ;). But with which lock you'd like to lock-around i_size update? Note that you have to make sure you won't race even with read path which currently doesn't take any locks at all (except for page lock) if I'm right... So, e.g. NFS, would have to wrap generic_file_aio_read() in some lock to prevent inode updates while generic_file_aio_read() runs. That doesn't sound too appealing to me. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> SUSE Labs, CR --
| Jeff Garzik | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Christoph Hellwig | Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scan... |
| Heiko Carstens | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jens Axboe | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Emmanuel Dreyfus | fixing send(2) semantics (kern/29750) |
| Christos Zoulas | Re: Melting down your network [Subject changed] |
| Juan RP | Changing the I/O scheduler on-the-fly |
| Emmanuel Dreyfus | Re: fixing send(2) semantics (kern/29750) |
