On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 11:22:15AM +0000, David Howells wrote: > Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Just making inode_lock() interruptible would break everything. > > Why? Obviously, you'd need to check the result of the inode_lock(), which I > didn't put in my very rough example code, but why would taking the lock at the > front of a vfs op like mkdir be a problem? Existing callers don't check for errors, so maybe-interruptible-depending-on-context has to be a new function. > > For overlayfs it doesn't really make sense, but for network fs and > > fuse I guess it could be interesting. > > But overlayfs calls down into other filesystems - and those might be, say, > network filesystems that want to be interruptible. yup, and our interruptible vs. non interruptible stuff has always been a wacky patchwork
