Re: [RFC] atomic create+open

> No, but what value does an extra function call add then when you already
> have lookup intents?

Just to provide a proper interface, and not have to extend open
intents further.

Earlier you said, that intents are meant to be optional, so this
atomicity requirement is getting further from the "intent" concept.

Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC] atomic create+open
    • From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
    • From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Debug: sleeping function called from invalid context at include/linux/rwsem.h:66
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC] atomic create+open
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]