From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anton Altaparmakov Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.16] loop.c to use write ops for fs requiring special locking [try #2] Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 19:46:48 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <1141231737.15117.88.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com> <20060301140902.53350bb6.akpm@osdl.org> <1142031897.27533.40.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com> <20060310151353.584ddfd5.akpm@osdl.org> <1143220052.12806.27.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.137]:48040 "EHLO ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932652AbWCXTrC (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2006 14:47:02 -0500 To: Robert S Peterson In-Reply-To: <1143220052.12806.27.camel@technetium.msp.redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org 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 (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/