On Mon, 13 May 2024 at 14:41, Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That said, if the reader (fuse_readahead()) can handle possible > corrupted data, we can mark is with data_race() annotation. Then I > understand we don't need to mark the write with WRITE_ONCE(). Adding Willy, since the readahead code in fuse is fairly special. I don't think it actually matters if "fc->num_background >= fc->congestion_threshold" returns false positive or false negative, but I don't have a full understanding of how readahead works. Willy, can you please look at fuse_readahead() to confirm that breaking out of the loop is okay if (rac->ra->async_size >= readahead_count(rac)) no mater what? Thanks, Miklos
