From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fscrypt: cache decrypted symlink target in
 ->i_link
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:44:14 +0100
Message-ID: <20190410034414.GW2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20190409233544.156665-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>
 <20190410003346.GT2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190410004553.GA2454@sol.localdomain>
 <20190410010425.GU2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190410012247.GB2454@sol.localdomain>
 <20190410013934.GV2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190410025808.GA7140@sol.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net>
Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
 by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps
 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>) id 1hE49w-0004n0-Rb
 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:44:24 +0000
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2])
 by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps
 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1)
 id 1hE49u-00AwYl-QP
 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:44:24 +0000
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190410025808.GA7140@sol.localdomain>
List-Id: <linux-f2fs-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/options/linux-f2fs-devel>,
 <mailto:linux-f2fs-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=linux-f2fs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-f2fs-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel>,
 <mailto:linux-f2fs-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 07:58:08PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:

> It could check a flag IOP_GET_LINK in ->i_opflags instead, so it would be the
> same number of checks.  See patch below.

With that patch ->i_link is completely unused if ->get_link() is non-NULL,
so you get a method call on each traversal...

> Benefits are that we get code that isn't actively misleading (via
> simple_get_link() existing but actually never being called), and filesystems can
> cache a symlink target in ->i_link if it becomes available later, i.e. if it's
> not immediately available at iget() time.  Otherwise a filesystem-private field
> has to be used instead.  (For fscrypt, I'd probably use fscrypt_info::ci_link.)

What's to stop you from doing just that right now?  You'd need to take
care with barriers, but you'd need that anyway... As soon as ->i_link is set
you'll get no more ->get_link() on that sucker, using the cached value
from that point on.  IDGI...