From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4 v3] fs: Remove i_devices from struct inode
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 20:20:26 +0000
Message-ID: <20141104202018.GM7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <1415096851-17209-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
 <20141104153940.GH7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <54592D49.4070704@amacapital.net>
 <20141104195514.GA28531@quack.suse.cz>
 <CALCETrV3DauoM0x9aiEdKtZLxXqfeEapsWD-t3n_norkX5To7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrV3DauoM0x9aiEdKtZLxXqfeEapsWD-t3n_norkX5To7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 12:14:26PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> Yeah, this idea clearly doesn't work.  But I wonder whether the
> revised variant (which may be just moving cd_forget and bd_forget from
> evict to iput_final) would work.

How the hell is it better?  Neither of those will happen as long as dentry
is retained.  And with /dev on tmpfs (which is bloody common) _that_ won't
happen until device node is unlinked...