Re: [PATCH] fs: use __fput_sync in close(2)

["Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 10:15, Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> I think you're at least missing the removal of the PF_KTHREAD check
>
> Yup.
>
>>                 It'd be neat to leave that in so
>> __fput_sync() doesn't get proliferated to non PF_KTHREAD without us
>> noticing. So maybe we just need a tiny primitive.
>
> Considering that over the decade we've had this, we've only grown two
> cases of actually using it, I think we're fine.

That and two cases of flush_delayed_fput() followed by task_work_run().

That combined with a maintainer who was actively against any new
calls to __fput_sync and a version of __fput_sync that called BUG_ON
if you used it.

So I am not 100% convinced that there were so few calls to __fput_sync
simply because people couldn't think of a need for it.

Eric