On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 03:22:04PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > (Assuming there's no syncv involved here...?)
No. While I think we could implement it for XFS similar how we roll transactions over multiple inodes for a few transactions, the use case is much more limited, and the potential pitfalls are much bigger. > > have to check the F_IOINFO fcntl before, which is a bit of a killer. > > Because of that I've also not implemented any other validity checks > > yet, as they might make thing even worse when an open on a not supported > > file system or device fails, but not on an old kernel. Maybe we need > > a new open version that checks arguments properly first? > > Does fcntl(F_SETFL...) suffer from this? Yes.
