From: "Kweh, Hock Leong" <hock.leong.kweh@intel.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
CC: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
        "Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>,
        Roy Franz <roy.franz@linaro.org>, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 2/2] efi: an sysfs interface for user to update efi
 firmware
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v4 2/2] efi: an sysfs interface for user to update efi
 firmware
Thread-Index: AQHQdrzO9Y2+ZGg6U0KLDsR6juvZY51N4NhA//+pEQCAAVzbQIAB0EYAgAANNQCAA67xIIABCe6AgAE5nKCAAlwLZf//mNaAgAGjweD//9tdgAApwlLA
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 02:14:47 +0000
Message-ID: <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2CC12798@PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
References: <20150415131906.GC21491@kroah.com>
	 <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2B8D2E74@PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
	 <20150417134924.GB19794@kroah.com>
	 <20150417143640.GB3671@codeblueprint.co.uk>
	 <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2C279176@PGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com>
	 <20150420144323.GA7261@kroah.com>
	 <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2CC11869@PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
	 <20150421075620.GA11000@kroah.com>
	 <1429665679.2207.44.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
	 <CALCETrX9GZmWnfkm-CwKW-2mPvRbNcRaY6tUY=8e0THsPBKMcA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20150422132734.GB12062@redhat.com>
	 <1429715913.2195.22.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
	 <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2CC1259B@PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
 <1429798187.2170.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
In-Reply-To: <1429798187.2170.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 1630
Lines: 43

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 10:10 PM
> 
> On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 08:30 +0000, Kweh, Hock Leong wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: James Bottomley
> [mailto:James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 11:19 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I think we've all agreed we can do it ... it's now a question of whether
> we
> > > can stomach the ick factor of actually initiating a transaction in close ... I'm
> still
> > > feeling queasy.
> >
> > The file "close" here can I understand that the file system will call the
> "release"
> > function at the file_operations struct?
> > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/include/linux/fs.h#L1538
> >
> > So, James you are meaning that we could initiating the update transaction
> > inside the f_ops->release() and return the error code if update failed in this
> > function?
> 
> Well, that's what I was thinking.  However the return value of ->release
> doesn't get propagated in sys_close (or indeed anywhere ... no idea why
> it returns an int) thanks to the task work additions, so we'd actually
> have to use the operation whose value is propagated in sys_close() which
> turns out to be flush.
> 
> James
> 

Okay, I think I got you. Just to double check for in case: you are meaning
to implement it at f_ops->flush() instead of f_ops->release().


Thanks & Regards,
Wilson

????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m????????????I?