From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:32255 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965204AbcJQVfx (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:35:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:35:50 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: fix locking for the reflink operation Message-ID: <20161017213550.GA7786@birch.djwong.org> References: <1476705920-32493-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1476705920-32493-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:05:16PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > When creating a reflink we need to take the iolock much earlier, as > various early checks done in xfs_file_share_range currently are racy > without it. Patches 1-3 sort that out in a minimal invasive way, > but I think we should just merge xfs_file_share_range and > xfs_reflink_remap_range, which is what patch 4 does. > > Patches 1-3 are something I'd like to see in 4.9, patch 4 might not > fully qualify, but just getting it in might make everyones life easier. This series (+ the CoW optimization series before it) seem to run ok here. I'm ok with (more soak testing and) sending it in for 4.9. --D > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html