From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Steve French (smfltc)" Subject: generic_file_llseek vs. remote_llseek Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:49:06 -0500 Message-ID: <44EB5FB2.8090005@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.145]:41690 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750864AbWHVTsR (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:48:17 -0400 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7MJmGcH031449 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:48:16 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/NCO v8.1.1) with ESMTP id k7MJmG4O291422 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:48:16 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k7MJmGGC004447 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:48:16 -0400 Received: from [9.41.38.123] (IBM-IF6TD2FSACS.austin.ibm.com [9.41.38.123]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7MJmG1S004432 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:48:16 -0400 To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Now that generic_file_llseek locks the inode, do we need to have anyone use remote_llseek? Although remote_llseek is newer, it does a lock_kernel which seems excessive, unless it has to do with some isize_write race issue it is trying to avoid. The cifs code would probably be fine with the change to the (presumably faster) generic_file_llseek, and perhas the nfs code as weel..