Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751248AbVJFRZb (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:25:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751247AbVJFRZb (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:25:31 -0400 Received: from 223-177.adsl.pool.ew.hu ([193.226.223.177]:43271 "EHLO dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751245AbVJFRZb (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:25:31 -0400 To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org In-reply-to: <1128618447.8396.39.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> (message from Trond Myklebust on Thu, 06 Oct 2005 13:07:27 -0400) Subject: Re: [RFC] atomic create+open References: <1128616864.8396.32.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <1128618447.8396.39.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Message-Id: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:23:57 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 566 Lines: 15 > No, but what value does an extra function call add then when you already > have lookup intents? Just to provide a proper interface, and not have to extend open intents further. Earlier you said, that intents are meant to be optional, so this atomicity requirement is getting further from the "intent" concept. Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/