From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953F4C71153 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:43:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232018AbjH1Kmh (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2023 06:42:37 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40632 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231866AbjH1KmR (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2023 06:42:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF41312D for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 03:42:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-52889bc61b6so4197991a12.0 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 03:42:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=szeredi.hu; s=google; t=1693219332; x=1693824132; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TEiIl2q/mAXEAg7LokmrWsxbswvKwcTP+hCWc0dcqlQ=; b=dDil6g0wecI4ddNK/0+WITpAK1unUwtyQ4gd+RVl/cJflN0BWg7pc9qvXo8t4R+s/o SgmphAY8HJtmtKbFsv7+WNsSHYmNX6Qg1sfA4gdOXI0cUkmckZILq9YNMipsfSgo7OxO E2Qf3w2i8XQAKN+aqh84/N7VG9UdlEdiqwppE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1693219332; x=1693824132; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=TEiIl2q/mAXEAg7LokmrWsxbswvKwcTP+hCWc0dcqlQ=; b=iJIv9XxWutBjBXQBwjBLGtOXDSqCKZUCu7+VH7a80V8iYtMS3pvmqeqvmTJ2sS7x7s sTednQdJZH1v9RFsoWQCM2EE6VxGTDiMxkW53GAVW+LU8MBtmjZ+sIsOlMx2D3mvZUDi 55zHSDOQ9VZik3847RtEcu5GbHOTFJwruNN4lORtOs9406gxuVpWsfvSSqOFRXjnna+h GuCPAwGeBTm+gdR2UGRz9LuFsq738SlXAag1+dVxdrGl3ibjyTXqPL67/lP+WnJvrG7j khVP2KgKtWdrrhee+PeDxwdXcoYNoeMMu+C4+XZ/d4wf7cBriKWwsKA1TV3E8rv7+k9Y zBfA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzikZw7qzbLvd0k2+ZSsvM9BiVvG7zrFySx3KO263KvPFEgOowR wqrfTklMs6pPOReWYzw2Xd7BE71rHDokzLlKrKiP//Hg0qPfTrheTAc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHTzmpgxFwaSRUOrMOtm/N9LQxnpGoPqj+fJ89NnsUesyJGNYkAPTURMRecKAclt3oeVr1bz/bKCeCN99lBX0E= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:150:b0:9a1:d7cd:602d with SMTP id 16-20020a170906015000b009a1d7cd602dmr11265049ejh.45.1693219332336; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 03:42:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230824150533.2788317-1-bschubert@ddn.com> <20230824150533.2788317-4-bschubert@ddn.com> In-Reply-To: <20230824150533.2788317-4-bschubert@ddn.com> From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:42:01 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] fuse: Allow parallel direct writes for O_DIRECT To: Bernd Schubert Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm, dsingh@ddn.com, Hao Xu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 17:08, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > Take a shared lock in fuse_cache_write_iter. > > Cc: Hao Xu > Cc: Miklos Szeredi > Cc: Dharmendra Singh > Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Bernd Schubert > --- > fs/fuse/file.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/fuse/file.c b/fs/fuse/file.c > index a16f9b6888de..905ce3bb0047 100644 > --- a/fs/fuse/file.c > +++ b/fs/fuse/file.c > @@ -1314,9 +1314,10 @@ static bool fuse_dio_wr_exclusive_lock(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from > struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp; > struct fuse_file *ff = file->private_data; > > - return !(ff->open_flags & FOPEN_PARALLEL_DIRECT_WRITES) || > - iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_APPEND || > - fuse_direct_write_extending_i_size(iocb, from); > + return ((!(iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_DIRECT)) || > + (!(ff->open_flags & FOPEN_PARALLEL_DIRECT_WRITES)) || Why the extra parenthesis around the negation in the above two conditions? So this condition will always be true at this point when called from fuse_cache_write_iter()? If so, you need to explain in the commit message why are you doing this at this point (e.g. future patches depend on this). Thanks, Miklos