Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 18:59:40 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
Message-ID: <20051006175940.GA19766@mail.shareable.org>
References: <E1ENWt1-000363-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <1128616864.8396.32.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <E1ENZ8u-0003JS-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <1128618447.8396.39.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <E1ENZTJ-0003Mm-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <1128620196.16534.20.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1128620196.16534.20.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 935
Lines: 23

Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > Earlier you said, that intents are meant to be optional, so this
> > atomicity requirement is getting further from the "intent" concept.
> 
> No it is not. It is bang right in the middle of the intent concept.
> 
> Intents are there in order to allow the filesystem to determine which
> operation is calling lookup so that it can optimise for that particular
> operation.

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.

-- Jamie
-
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/