On 2/1/24 7:08 AM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> @@ -1591,10 +1616,10 @@ static ssize_t fuse_direct_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
> else {
> inode_lock_shared(inode);
>
> - /* A race with truncate might have come up as the decision for
> - * the lock type was done without holding the lock, check again.
> + /*
> + * Previous check was without any lock and might have raced.
> */
> - if (fuse_direct_write_extending_i_size(iocb, from)) {
> + if (fuse_dio_wr_exclusive_lock(iocb, from)) {
^
The overall is good. Maybe fuse_io_past_eof() is better to make it a
solely cleanup or refactoring. Actually it's already changed back to
fuse_io_past_eof() in patch 3/5.
--
Thanks,
Jingbo
