Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190317142524.GA5136@nautica>
In-Reply-To: <20190317142524.GA5136@nautica>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Sun, 17 Mar 2019 09:15:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgywWzGP-UszbL4csXpk4_h0w5PbkZYdaTpBzue82btfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] 9p updates for 5.1
To:     Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
Cc:     v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 7:25 AM Dominique Martinet
<asmadeus@codewreck.org> wrote:
>
> Two fixes (leak on invalid mount argument and possible deadlock on
> i_size update on 32bit smp) and a fall-through warning cleanup

Hmm. I wonder what makes it valid to have concurrent updates to
i_size? Yes, yes, you added that spinlock to make the update itself
atomic on 32-bit, but it sounds a bit odd in the first place to have
two things possibly changing the size of a file at the same time...

Anyway, pulled, but just surprised...

            Linus