[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:0.019 / U:15.104 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site