Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:46003 "EHLO mail-ie0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1764094Ab3DDRpV (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Apr 2013 13:45:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130404090232.30457b32@corrin.poochiereds.net> References: <1362065133-9490-1-git-send-email-piastry@etersoft.ru> <1362065133-9490-7-git-send-email-piastry@etersoft.ru> <20130311145434.707f5ed1@corrin.poochiereds.net> <20130312083517.770a17f6@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20130404090232.30457b32@corrin.poochiereds.net> Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 21:45:20 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] NFSv4: Add O_DENY* open flags support From: Pavel Shilovsky To: Jeff Layton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs , linux-fsdevel , Linux NFS Mailing list , wine-devel@winehq.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2013/4/4 Jeff Layton : > I'd probably still stick with a FS_* flag for this... > > That sort of mechanism would work (for now) but sounds like the sort of > subtle behavior that's difficult for filesystem authors to get right. > It would also be subject to subtle breakage later. > > Also, suppose there are changes in the future that require you to > determine this before calling into ->open? Then you'll have to go back > and somehow mark the fs anyway... Ok, this makes sense, thanks. Will do it this way and repost. -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky.