From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp06-ext.udag.de (smtp06-ext.udag.de [62.146.106.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1245B20C029; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.146.106.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768484309; cv=none; b=NRBdqrHGeF+1DYmQx7r+YUz6M4T83swzF6TeLJujgmigTXTpxaE2JtqgmPiFXL7AUEqVQEMfSAMvYYQjbKRX5kDgBZ3fyUpKlArZIWlFZn5zQxhid06bYWJQnZoX1vnDHUHRFccJMI8MYKdK07HTnk25pjVhQOvvOb5kVTePagU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768484309; c=relaxed/simple; bh=q3NAWJ07/6y+gOMssR9e3T5Wh9anZdBM7o4HUlQUtag=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lQPlptMcuWfvqUqxjFavjfW4IrDG+PSjX2DanUr2FA7UN2T88vEiV4zZShDDRNSXeppowkQ72L77UluyH32kJhwuMHKBMG+RUkShELKM3i261H5HOsV2v9Gbd9ZSh9A/0e8KGLwtqts8Dcc4ig+QTEI3d3Ct5MOot0BDzOgEEDg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=birthelmer.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=birthelmer.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.146.106.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=birthelmer.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=birthelmer.de Received: from localhost (200-143-067-156.ip-addr.inexio.net [156.67.143.200]) by smtp06-ext.udag.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7822FE0585; Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:38:25 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: smtp06-ext.udag.de; auth=pass smtp.auth=birthelmercom-0001 smtp.mailfrom=horst@birthelmer.de Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:38:24 +0100 From: Horst Birthelmer To: Joanne Koong Cc: Horst Birthelmer , Miklos Szeredi , Bernd Schubert , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Horst Birthelmer Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] fuse: add an implementation of open+getattr Message-ID: References: <20260109-fuse-compounds-upstream-v4-0-0d3b82a4666f@ddn.com> <20260109-fuse-compounds-upstream-v4-3-0d3b82a4666f@ddn.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 06:29:26PM -0800, Joanne Koong wrote: > On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 10:27 AM Horst Birthelmer wrote: > > > > + > > + err = fuse_compound_send(compound); > > + if (err) > > + goto out; > > + > > + err = fuse_compound_get_error(compound, 0); > > + if (err) > > + goto out; > > + > > + err = fuse_compound_get_error(compound, 1); > > + if (err) > > + goto out; > > Hmm, if the open succeeds but the getattr fails, why not process it > kernel-side as a success for the open? Especially since on the server > side, libfuse will disassemble the compound request into separate > ones, so the server has no idea the open is even part of a compound. > > I haven't looked at the rest of the patch yet but this caught my > attention when i was looking at how fuse_compound_get_error() gets > used. > After looking at this again ... Do you think it would make sense to add an example of lookup+create, or would that just convolute things? > Thanks, > Joanne > Thanks, Horst