Re: [PATCH 1/2] fuse: replace fuse_queue_forget with fuse_force_forget if error

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 12:06, yangyun <yangyun50@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since forget is not necessarily synchronous (In my opinion, the pre-this patch use of
> synchronous 'fuse_force_forget' is an error case and also not necessarily synchronous),
> what about just changing the 'fuse_force_forget' to be asynchronous?

Even less impact would be to move the allocation inside
fuse_force_forget (make it GFP_NOFAIL) and still use the
fuse_queue_forget() function to send the forget as e.g. virtiofs
handles them differently from regular requests.

Thanks,
Miklos