From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/21] vfs: atomic open v6 (part 2)
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 06:54:52 +0100
Message-ID: <20120610055452.GC30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <1338901832-14049-1-git-send-email-miklos@szeredi.hu>
 <20120610034921.GB30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	hch@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	dhowells@redhat.com, mszeredi@suse.cz
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:56378 "EHLO
	ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750852Ab2FJFy4 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 10 Jun 2012 01:54:56 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120610034921.GB30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

	BTW, I realize that right now you are relying on -EOPENSTALE
never coming out of ->atomic_open(), but that needs to be documented.
For now I'm adding BUG_ON() there as a crude way of documenting it;
AFAICS, there's no point whatsoever doing retries in that case.