On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:05:16PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > When creating a reflink we need to take the iolock much earlier, as > various early checks done in xfs_file_share_range currently are racy > without it. Patches 1-3 sort that out in a minimal invasive way, > but I think we should just merge xfs_file_share_range and > xfs_reflink_remap_range, which is what patch 4 does. > > Patches 1-3 are something I'd like to see in 4.9, patch 4 might not > fully qualify, but just getting it in might make everyones life easier. This series (+ the CoW optimization series before it) seem to run ok here. I'm ok with (more soak testing and) sending it in for 4.9. --D > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
