Re: Linux 2.6.26-rc4

[Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>]

On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 09:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Al Viro wrote:
> > > 
> > > If the dentry is unhashed, it means that it _either_
> > > 
> > >  - has already been deleted (rmdir'ed) or d_invalidate()'d. Right?
> > > 
> > >    I don't see why you should ever return the dentry in this case..
> > 
> > From my reading of that code looks like it's been rmdir'ed.  And no, I
> > don't understand what the hell is that code trying to do.
> 
> Hmm. Looking closer, I think that code is meant to handle the 
> d_invalidate() that it did in autofs4_tree_busy().
> 
> However, that should never trigger for a directory entry that can be 
> reached some other way, because that code has done a "dget()" on the 
> dentry, and d_invalidate() does
> 
> 	if (atomic_read(&dentry->d_count) > 1) {
> 		if (dentry->d_inode && S_ISDIR(dentry->d_inode->i_mode)) {
> 			..unlock..
> 			return -EBUSY;
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> so I dunno. I still think the expire code shouldn't even use 
> d_invalidate() at all, and just revalidate() at lookup. 

Yes, perhaps not.
A job for another day.

Ian