On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 09:50:14AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 09:05:34AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > There's no need for mnt_want_write_file() to increment mnt_writers when > > the file is already open for writing, provided that > > mnt_drop_write_file() is changed to conditionally decrement it. > > > > We seem to have ended up in the current situation because > > mnt_want_write_file() used to be paired with mnt_drop_write(), due to > > mnt_drop_write_file() not having been added yet. So originally > > mnt_want_write_file() had to always increment mnt_writers. > > > > But later mnt_drop_write_file() was added, and all callers of > > mnt_want_write_file() were paired with it. This makes the compatibility > > between mnt_want_write_file() and mnt_drop_write() no longer necessary. > > > > Therefore, make __mnt_want_write_file() and __mnt_drop_write_file() skip > > incrementing mnt_writers on files already open for writing. This > > removes the only caller of mnt_clone_write(), so remove that too. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Al, any thoughts on this patch? > Ping?
