On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 09:21:41AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > I don't want to do that to Christian either, I think highly of the work > > > he's been doing and I don't want to be adding to his frustration. So I > > > apologize for loosing my cool earlier; a lot of that was frustration > > > from other threads spilling over. > > > > > > But: if he's going to be raising objections, I need to know what his > > > concerns are if we're going to get anywhere. Raising objections without > > > saying what the concerns are shuts down discussion; I don't think it's > > > unreasonable to ask people not to do that, and to try and stay focused > > > on the code. > > > > The technical aspects were made clear off-list and I believe multiple > > times on-list by now. Any VFS and block related patches are to be > > reviewed and accepted before bcachefs gets merged. > > Here's the one VFS patch in the series - could we at least get an ack > for this? It's a new helper, just breaks the existing d_tmpfile() up > into two functions - I hope we can at least agree that this patch > shouldn't be controversial? > > -->-- > Subject: [PATCH] fs: factor out d_mark_tmpfile() > > New helper for bcachefs - bcachefs doesn't want the > inode_dec_link_count() call that d_tmpfile does, it handles i_nlink on > its own atomically with other btree updates > > Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Yep, that looks good, Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
