From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
bfields@fieldses.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rpc_pipe: set dentry operations at d_alloc time
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:00:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130714140011.GI4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1372784452-2403-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 01:00:52PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Currently the way these get set is a little convoluted. If the dentry is
> allocated via lookup from userland, then it gets set by simple_lookup.
> If it gets allocated when the kernel is populating the directory, then
> it gets set via __rpc_lookup_create_exclusive, which has to check
> whether they might already be set. Between both of these, this ensures
> that all dentries have their d_op pointer set.
>
> Instead of doing that, just have them set at d_alloc time by pointing
> sb->s_d_op at them. With that change, we no longer want the lookup op
> to set them, so we must move to using our own lookup routine.
There's a better solution - just make simple_lookup() skip d_set_d_op()
if superblock already has ->s_d_op (and thus d_alloc() has already
set the damn thing). Voila - we can just set ->s_d_op and leave
inode_operations as is.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust
<Trond.Myklebust-HgOvQuBEEgTQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rpc_pipe: set dentry operations at d_alloc time
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:00:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130714140011.GI4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1372784452-2403-1-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 01:00:52PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Currently the way these get set is a little convoluted. If the dentry is
> allocated via lookup from userland, then it gets set by simple_lookup.
> If it gets allocated when the kernel is populating the directory, then
> it gets set via __rpc_lookup_create_exclusive, which has to check
> whether they might already be set. Between both of these, this ensures
> that all dentries have their d_op pointer set.
>
> Instead of doing that, just have them set at d_alloc time by pointing
> sb->s_d_op at them. With that change, we no longer want the lookup op
> to set them, so we must move to using our own lookup routine.
There's a better solution - just make simple_lookup() skip d_set_d_op()
if superblock already has ->s_d_op (and thus d_alloc() has already
set the damn thing). Voila - we can just set ->s_d_op and leave
inode_operations as is.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-14 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-25 1:05 [PATCH 0/2] rpc_pipe: clean up how dentry operations get set in rpc_pipefs Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 1:05 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 1:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] rpc_pipe: export simple_dentry_operations and have rpc_pipefs use it Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 15:36 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-06-25 15:36 ` Myklebust, Trond
2013-07-01 16:22 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-01 16:22 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-02 15:29 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-02 15:29 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 1:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] rpc_pipe: set dentry operations at d_alloc time Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 1:05 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 11:00 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-25 11:00 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-02 17:00 ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff Layton
2013-07-02 17:00 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-14 14:00 ` Al Viro [this message]
2013-07-14 14:00 ` Al Viro
2013-07-15 10:43 ` Jeff Layton
2013-07-15 10:43 ` Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130714140011.GI4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.