xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:24:26 -0400
Cc: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@xxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20110303213903.GL15097@dastard>
References: <4D6221B8.9040303@xxxxxxxxx> <4D6F5473.2070709@xxxxxxxxx> <20110303213903.GL15097@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:39:03AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> 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 checking
> immutable inodes? What is the point of adding it, when all that will
> happen is people will switch to XFS_IOC_UNRESVSP which has never had
> this limitation?

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_size, but it's
IMHO entirely correct for hole punching.  

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>