From: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4.19pre8][RFC] remove-NFS-close-to-open from VFS (was Re: [PATCHSET] 2.4.19-pre8-jp12)
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 13:12:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021018171211.GA12509@ravel.coda.cs.cmu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15792.16095.699839.453962@charged.uio.no>
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 07:03:27PM +0200, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> I agree that is a bug (and thanks for pointing it out). I do not,
> however, see it as an argument for turning off revalidation
> altogether.
> Perhaps the right thing to do then is to pass down a flag
> (LOOKUP_DOT?) that states that we are in fact doing a revalidation of
> '.' and/or '..' ?
That would help me a lot as I can then reliably recognize when
d_revalidate is called from the new 'context' and try to appropriately
handle this case.
Let me get the POSIX stuff right, In the case of open('.') in your
example, I guess d_revalidate would check the inode to see if the object
was removed. And possibly retry the lookup, but if that fails only
unhash the dentry, not return a 'validation failure'.
So, we're not really revalidating the dcache entry at all. Maybe the
code really wants to revalidate the inode.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-18 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200205162142.AWF00051@netmail.netcologne.de>
[not found] ` <E178TUb-0005Bh-00@the-village.bc.nu>
[not found] ` <20020517034357.GA18449@ravel.coda.cs.cmu.edu>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205161105520.5254-100000@alumno.inacap.cl>
2002-10-17 20:38 ` [PATCH 2.4.19pre8][RFC] remove-NFS-close-to-open from VFS (was Re: [PATCHSET] 2.4.19-pre8-jp12) Jan Harkes
2002-10-17 21:48 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-10-17 22:16 ` Jan Harkes
2002-10-17 23:57 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-10-18 16:49 ` Jan Harkes
2002-10-18 17:03 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-10-18 17:12 ` Jan Harkes [this message]
2002-10-18 17:41 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-10-18 18:23 ` Jan Harkes
2002-10-18 19:23 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-10-21 17:07 ` Jan Harkes
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=20021018171211.GA12509@ravel.coda.cs.cmu.edu \
--to=jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).