Re: [PATCH v3] ocfs2: Let ocfs2_setattr use new truncate sequence.

[Tao Ma]

Joel Becker wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:27:11AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>   
> > You just leave the duplicate inode_newsize_ok in, but still have
> > one as part of inode_change_ok.  See the previous thread - we'll
> > need to move inode_change_ok to under the cluster locks, both
> > for the truncate and non-truncate case.
> >     
>
> 	Is your concern that the u/gid checks may be against stale ids?
>   
So I think we should have one inode_change_ok before the cluster lock 
and another after the cluster lock.
The first one will save us a lot of cluster lock effort if the user pass 
us the wrong arguments while the later
one will test again with the refreshed inode info.

Regards,
Tao
>   
> > > +		truncate_setsize(inode, attr->ia_size);
> > >       
> > But any reason this isn't done inside the
> >
> >         if (size_change && attr->ia_size != inode->i_size) {
> >
> > conditional above?  You'll never get size and uid/gid changes in the
> > same request, so there won't be any change in behaviour.
> >     
>
> 	I think the code exists as-is so that the i_size update only
> happens after the quota transfer has been approved.  Jan added the quota
> bits in this location.
> 	I can't see a standard posix op that changes size and ids at the
> same time.  I think we just add BUG_ON expressions that ensure such a
> behavior, right?
>
> Joel
>
>   

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/