Re: [patch 2.6.16] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking [try #2]

[Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>]

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Robert S Peterson wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-11 at 00:36 +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > When we've remembered what Al's statement meant in
> > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=102129995600002&r=1&w=2
> > This is no longer relevant because my patch which is in current 2.6 
> > kernels (can't remember when I wrote it/when it got put into 2.6) did the 
> > conversion from prepare_write/commit_write to file ->write correctly so 
> > the data transformation still happens so that crypto still works with the 
> > loop driver.
> > 
> > To get back to Robert's patch that he is requesting to be included.  I 
> > think it is fine but the flag name could perhaps be better.  Perhaps 
> > "FS_AOPS_PRIVATE" or "FS_AOPS_SPECIAL" or "FS_AOPS_NEED_LOCKING" or 
> > even "FS_AOPS_REQUIRE_LOCKING" or something.  "FS_REQUIRES_LOCKING" just 
> > does not mean much and certainly would not suggest to me that no-one 
> > outside the file system should use the address space operations of the 
> > file system...  But maybe I am just bein picky.  (-:
> 
> Here is a resubmission of my patch to loop.c, this time against the
> 2.6.16 kernel.
> 
> Andrew: Sounds like Anton answered your concerns.
> Anton:  As per your suggestion, I changed the constant to your suggested
> FS_AOPS_NEED_LOCKING.

Looks good.

Best regards,

	Anton
-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/