[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] atomic create+open
> I think Miklos' point is that it's not an "optimisation" because it's
> not optional. Optimisations are things where if you don't do them,
> the behaviour is still correct but slower.
> As far as I can tell from this discussion, the atomic lookup+create is
> a non-optional requirement.


Trond, you wrote this in an earlier discussion:

> > so the filesystem can delay returning the error from the open
> > operation until the other errors have been sorted out by the lookup
> > code.
> Intents are meant as optimisations, not replacements for existing
> operations. I'm therefore not really comfortable about having them
> return errors at all.

The case I described is not an optimization, so in that case you seem
to agree, that lookup intents are not the solution.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-06 20:17    [W:0.088 / U:3.096 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site