Re: [PATCH v2 05/16] fs: Add RWF_ATOMIC and IOCB_ATOMIC flags for atomic write support

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


On 13/12/2023 13:31, Al Viro wrote:
Add file mode flag FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE, so files which do not have the
flag set will have RWF_ATOMIC rejected and not just ignored.

Signed-off-by: Prasad Singamsetty<prasad.singamsetty@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: John Garry<john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
  include/linux/fs.h      | 8 ++++++++
  include/uapi/linux/fs.h | 5 ++++-
  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
index 70329c81be31..d725c194243c 100644
--- a/include/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
@@ -185,6 +185,9 @@ typedef int (dio_iodone_t)(struct kiocb *iocb, loff_t offset,
  /* File supports async nowait buffered writes */
  #define FMODE_BUF_WASYNC	((__force fmode_t)0x80000000)
+/* File supports atomic writes */
+#define FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE	((__force fmode_t)0x100000000)
Have you even tried to compile that on e.g. arm?

i386 and now arm32, and no grumblings.

I think that the issue is that we only ever do a bitwise OR or test that bit 33 for a 32b value, and it is a void operation and ignored.

However if I have file.f_mode = FMODE_CAN_ATOMIC_WRITE and compile for arm32, then it complains.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux