On 2/7/24 9:38 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>
>
> On 2/6/24 10:20, Jingbo Xu wrote:
>>
>>
>> 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)) {
>> ^
I mean, in patch 2/5
> - if (fuse_direct_write_extending_i_size(iocb, from)) {
> + if (fuse_io_past_eof(iocb, from)) {
is better, otherwise it's not an equivalent change.
Thanks,
Jingbo
