From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marco Stornelli Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:40:26 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4D6221B8.9040303@gmail.com> <4D6F5473.2070709@gmail.com> <20110303213903.GL15097@dastard> <20110314102426.GA29888@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Dave Chinner , Linux Kernel , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, cluster-devel@redhat.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com, Linux FS Devel To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110314102426.GA29888@infradead.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org 2011/3/14 Christoph Hellwig : > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:39:03AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: >> WTF? =A0Why does append mode have any effect on whether we can punch >> holes in a file or not? There's no justification for adding this in >> the commit message. Why is it even in a patch that is for checking >> immutable inodes? What is the point of adding it, when all that will >> happen is people will switch to XFS_IOC_UNRESVSP which has never had >> this limitation? > > xfs_ioc_space unconditionally rejects inodes with S_APPEND set for > all preallocation / hole punching ioctls. =A0This might be overzealou= s for > preallocations not changing the size, or just extending i_size, but i= t's > IMHO entirely correct for hole punching. > xfs_ioc_space is in the ioctl path, but we are talking about the fallocate path. Both of them calls the xfs_change_file_space, isnt'it? However we are agree about hole punching, the patch is already in Linus's git tree. Marco -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html