Re: [patch 13/13] lseek speedup

[Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>]

Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> 
> >  Now, why are we taking i_sem for lseek/readdir
> >exclusion and not a per-file lock?
> 
> Because it also excludes against directory modifications, etc. Just imagine
> what "rm somefile" or "mv somefile otherfile" or "touch newfile" would do
> to the directory contents and what a concurrent readdir() would do... A
> very loud *BANG* is the only thing that springs to mind...

That's different.  i_size, contents of things, yes - i_sem for
those.

But protection of struct file should not be via any per-inode thing.

> btw. the directory modification locking rules are written up in
> Documentation/filesystems/directory-locking by our very own VFS maintainer
> Al Viro himself... (-;

Doesn't cover lseek...

-