On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:02:41PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:09:46PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > I would definitely prefer EEXIST logics dealt with in fs/namei.c - if nothing > > > else, it had been done wrong in too many instances... > > > > Okay. > > OK, so I'm taking 1, 5, 9, 10, 11, then add check to fs/namei.c:atomic_open(), > leaving the rest of gfs2 ones for gfs2 tree... Give me a few and I'll push > that. Pushed (head at d332c7). That should cover 9p and fuse as well, AFAICS. Do you have any problems with that variant? -- 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
