From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (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 0176A3546F7; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 19:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761766684; cv=none; b=aAPMurJckxmXG6M1srIeN4MiUo3RMHfcrspImq0eDt0eYnRyQq3zT/Xo4UKazoMittdohgeFL8jOi8X+QDa751ZUojemWitIx7G1/2FZomb0zWYEqyqqj3My7OFeeqQ3QfaJ7Q9vp/2TiwNKwB/dx4DL7E6CnwWbgZbtcKfYTSo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761766684; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xsNLpyLkzRnYs0RTXCX9wZoNLXUCsEdQjjjmmCKauJI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ULetErPSqyJXJudTJ4T32DIFbSW8zn30hz+wvTuu4nD3H+YjiNltW0mrwbq9Jkuf/+Zi8seYNha28UU8lSK2O+pObeZZVqn961FQS8xjDvo03KOXPnJnhgfdBV9W+JN3img4TJnkqaeYEkwE8NLR0sG+h8JuNy5T1vt5V6ezcko= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=gDSHktUU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="gDSHktUU" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=O3wlz2ynSn5ZcGy2srCWEEseivI55gIJnD+HtUPEfxA=; b=gDSHktUU6QTsq14G2ZkRn8yePC Hzq86cB27L7IDzGmOQ4PgkSiy9xgLfqMgADtMr8DuQqi7m4vB89lz3p+i2NioSQejhH+ZWejmhFny 5XVnwBvWfeQ4w+DXrBuHtoCWeJpnyp/cRQueiFSYZ2b2I/SZQBRaX7mJNGimhQ9z/QJ3yeRd/s4hb 58tfvD0mBPxhhc9IfMUHEJ4XM9ximHRwZSuicgtApVI7x/xzSuXRM6l4w07JDKHJUXYpLQIfRUg09 LpsQni2Q57A0tvpzbusesVftkmD+D02YP3tvEx7+qUqYRvQUcN6KIwG4Ua4Lk/WdekYsnfegMon4+ NiV/QXvA==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vEBzX-0000000F3m8-31yx; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 19:37:55 +0000 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 19:37:55 +0000 From: Al Viro To: James Bottomley Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, raven@themaw.net, miklos@szeredi.hu, neil@brown.name, a.hindborg@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev, kees@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, selinux@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 22/50] convert efivarfs Message-ID: <20251029193755.GU2441659@ZenIV> References: <20251028004614.393374-1-viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> <20251028004614.393374-23-viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> <66300d81c5e127e3bca8c6c4d997da386b142004.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20251028174540.GN2441659@ZenIV> <20251028210805.GP2441659@ZenIV> <9f079d0c8cffb150c0decb673a12bfe1b835efc9.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9f079d0c8cffb150c0decb673a12bfe1b835efc9.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Sender: Al Viro On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 02:57:51PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > I think this all looks OK. The reason for the convolution is that > simple_start/done_creating() didn't exist when I did the conversion ... > although if they had, I'm not sure I'd have thought of reworking > efivarfs_create_dentry to use them. I tried to update some redundant > bits, but it wasn't the focus of what I was trying to fix. > > So I think the cleanup works and looks nice. > > > > > Relying on the -EEXIST return value to detect duplicates, and > > combining the two callbacks seem like neat optimizations to me, so > > > > Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel > > > > but I have to confess I am slightly out of my depth when it comes to > > VFS stuff. > > Yes, ack too. Umm... FWIW, I've got a few more followups on top of that (see #untested.efivarfs, current head at 36051c773015). Not sure what would be the best way to deal with that stuff - I hope to get the main series stabilized and merged in the coming window. Right now I'm collecting feedback (acked-by, etc.), and there's a couple of outright bugfixes in front of the series, so I'd expect at least a rebase to -rc4... Hell knows - one variant would be a never-rebased branch containing the introduction of simple_done_creating() + variant of efivarfs patch (as posted) ported on top of that (with d_instantiate()+dget() in place of d_make_persistent()), then have both #work.persistency and efivarfs followups pulling that branch... Or I could simply hold them back until the next cycle. Up to you - the main series is what I really want to get out of the way ASAP, especially considering the potential for conflicts with the stuff Neil Brown is playing with.