Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+v2\]\s+Check\s+for\s+immutable\s+flag\s+in\s+fallocate\s+path\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+v2\]\s+Check\s+for\s+immutable\s+flag\s+in\s+fallocate\s+path\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 09:42:27 +0100; All fs must check for the immutable flag in their fallocate callback. It's possible to have a race condition in this scenario: an application open a file in read/write and it does something, meanwhil; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00037.html (11,079 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 08:39:03 +1100; WTF? Why does append mode have any effect on whether we can punch holes in a file or not? There's no justification for adding this in the commit message. Why is it even in a patch that is for checkin; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00045.html (12,655 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 09:17:00 +0100; Hi Dave, Il 03/03/2011 22:39, Dave Chinner ha scritto: I don't understand this point. The theory of operation was: 1) we don't allow any operation (reserve/unreserve) on a immutable file; 2) we don't; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00052.html (11,296 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 13:18:36 +0100; Il 04/03/2011 09:17, Marco Stornelli ha scritto: Oops, I meant setflags in ioctl path, sorry. At this point I'm waiting for response about how to manage the append flag and how to manage the lock on; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00055.html (12,050 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:24:26 -0400; xfs_ioc_space unconditionally rejects inodes with S_APPEND set for all preallocation / hole punching ioctls. This might be overzealous for preallocations not changing the size, or just extending i_si; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00166.html (9,430 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path (score: 1): Author: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:40:26 +0100; 2011/3/14 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: xfs_ioc_space is in the ioctl path, but we are talking about the fallocate path. Both of them calls the xfs_change_file_space, isnt'it? However we are; /archives/xfs/2011-03/msg00168.html (10,822 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]