Thanks a lot Theodore Ts'o ...

 Thanks to all (kernel,ext4 ..etc. )developer for quick debug and
response...


On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Theodore Ts'o [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:33:28PM +0000,
bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:

quoted

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50981

as this is working properly with XFS, so in ext4/ext3...etc also we

shouldn't

quoted

require synchronization at the Application level,., FS should take care

of

quoted

locking... will we expecting the fix for the same ???

Meetmehiro,

At this point, there seems to be consensus that the kernel should take
care of the locking, and that this is not something that needs be a
worry for the application.  Whether this should be done in the file
system layer or in the mm layer is the current question at hand ---
since this is a bug that also affects btrfs and other non-XFS file
systems.

So the question is whether every file system which supports AIO should
add its own locking, or whether it should be done at the mm layer, and
at which point the lock in the XFS layer could be removed as no longer
necessary.

I've added linux-mm and linux-fsdevel to make sure all of the relevant
kernel developers are aware of this question/issue.

Regards,

                                                - Ted

-- 
thanks & regards
Hiro Lalwani