From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 820831EDA02; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749685130; cv=none; b=Tt9QRJ/L4qth7u1r7lbI8AUceaTfuoGtIsBV3WCtUyJ7bYZA2f3vVdbt+O5MW8OccMuXlS/FiHYAbkvoK2s+JaBszywaJzSrnvFHDvvjNrL3RejyfeRvF9sfdZm+kra9dG746B1Zt0ZcUTJO9J7w7MHhm7hIIjyudHMpnuK9NtI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749685130; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uqIVC5lH/KYq5ZMQbr3eDBFaQXB3hBnr+NN6nQseTn4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=OSJAoBJduYildjYvle/t8WIkGJGyDB1MQfdQYI3qRfx/JQsto6oP7PXsNvb/LXZN9KCc0Txaic5xdLNG/I02OrXzz25QFdAOl6vZpxwGJkHxwm/572PROlyO+Y+c91Bs9vJmSxpwYtDbOF/y+yBzR5b+mvizcxfyhvjBxIYABmA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=SkOC0izJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="SkOC0izJ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=gLi4q1Pf3yDQ5vkEwYbNMTHh4i7xmaOkqjOyF6eoxyY=; b=SkOC0izJuVXFGh34DQzhYDj8zh QW74OV6eD0JNGnHnwPHRLcn4XY2IKgNhhCYpsjGEbqULwmSvXGMmmD03+SPscjR8dWURgpWETCk5T iC2NhXHfhXUW+1nAc6woomfmw1ogDuzFWOES4UBm5FPmVtLes2JL9j4EfMDxpyNsN1D8AaiX1NccH D4DD36XY0cEkv1fzSYaQX1Xs4XU2s/94sA+CkYvopDQA39sLvPlwJ08IVJ7XyA9guodDq0sdFCKcV 3mjgVKeDlrVpasSeIaWn2LdNvdmRoaiJ1pFomuYxWWL59cg9c/UOSbpICGIj/z9p8y8HOBGIyITU2 VHG2Wpxw==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uPV1m-00000007mdR-3qHi; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 23:38:42 +0000 Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:38:42 +0100 From: Al Viro To: NeilBrown Cc: Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , David Howells , Tyler Hicks , Chuck Lever , Jeff Layton , Miklos Szeredi , Amir Goldstein , Kees Cook , Joel Granados , Namjae Jeon , Steve French , Sergey Senozhatsky , netfs@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] VFS: change old_dir and new_dir in struct renamedata to dentrys Message-ID: <20250611233842.GB1647736@ZenIV> References: <20250611225848.1374929-1-neil@brown.name> <20250611225848.1374929-2-neil@brown.name> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250611225848.1374929-2-neil@brown.name> Sender: Al Viro On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 08:57:02AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > all users of 'struct renamedata' have the dentry for the old and new > directories, and often have no use for the inode except to store it in > the renamedata. > > This patch changes struct renamedata to hold the dentry, rather than > the inode, for the old and new directories, and changes callers to > match. > > This results in the removal of several local variables and several > dereferences of ->d_inode at the cost of adding ->d_inode dereferences > to vfs_rename(). Umm... No objections, as long as overlayfs part is correct; it seems to be, but I hadn't checked every chunk there...