Re: [RFC] metadata updates vs. fetches (was Re: [PATCH v4] fs: Fix data race in inode_set_ctime_to_ts)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 11:10 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So I mention the "rename and extend i_size_seqcount" as a solution
> that I suspect might be acceptable if somebody has the motivation and
> energy, but honestly I also think "nobody can be bothered" is
> acceptable in practice.
>

So happens recently the metadata ordeal also came up around getattr
where a submitter wanted to lock the inode around it.

Looks like this is a recurring topic?

Until the day comes when someone has way too much time on their hands
and patches it up (even that may encounter resistance though), I do
think it would make sense to nicely write it down somewhere so for
easy reference -- maybe as a comment above getattr and note around
other places like the timespec helpers to read that.

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux