On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 02:29:34AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Btw, there's an easy way how we could get this right, in fact > the write_inode in XFS is already trying to do it, it's just the > caller not copying with it: > > - if we can't get locks for a non-blocking ->write_inode we return > EAGAIN, and the callers sets the dirty bits again. I like that solution; it might be one of the easier ways to maintain backwards compatibility. Especially since (correct me if I am wrong) the simpler file systems which always write out the inode in the case of a non-blocking write_inode, say, like say the fat file system, are immune from this specific problem, right? - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
