Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Message-ID: <05bfb010-6b00-edb1-0e28-889a2ff71503@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jun 2022 09:56:46 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] fat: add support for the renameat2 RENAME_EXCHANGE
 flag
Content-Language: en-US
To:     OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Cc:     Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
        Alberto Ruiz <aruiz@redhat.com>,
        Christian Kellner <ckellner@redhat.com>,
        Chung-Chiang Cheng <cccheng@synology.com>,
        Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
        Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220601173204.1372569-1-javierm@redhat.com>
From:   Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220601173204.1372569-1-javierm@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello OGAWA,

On 6/1/22 19:32, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The series adds support for the renameat2 system call RENAME_EXCHANGE flag
> (which allows to atomically replace two paths) to the vfat filesystem code.
> 
> There are many use cases for this, but we are particularly interested in
> making possible for vfat filesystems to be part of OSTree [0] deployments.
> 
> Currently OSTree relies on symbolic links to make the deployment updates
> an atomic transactional operation. But RENAME_EXCHANGE could be used [1]
> to achieve a similar level of robustness when using a vfat filesystem.
> 
> Patch #1 is just a preparatory patch to introduce the RENAME_EXCHANGE
> support, patch #2 moves some code blocks in vfat_rename() to a set of
> helper functions, that can be reused by tvfat_rename_exchange() that's
> added by patch #3 and finally patch #4 adds some kselftests to test it.
> 

I think that addressed all the issues you pointed out in v3, please let me
know if there's anything else that is needed for this patch series.

Would these be merged by you or should I ping someone else? I'm not
that familiar with how filesystem patches make into the mainline tree.

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat