Linux filesystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, clm@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fs: make sure to fail try_to_unlazy() and try_to_unlazy() for LOOKUP_CACHED
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2025 08:58:26 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251220085826.GB1712166@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251220054023.142134-1-mjguzik@gmail.com>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2025 at 06:40:22AM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Otherwise the slowpath can be taken by the caller, defeating the flag.
> 
> This regressed after calls to legitimize_links() started being
> conditionally elided and stems from the routine always failing
> after seeing the flag, regardless if there were any links.
> 
> In order to address both the bug and the weird semantics make it illegal
> to call legitimize_links() with LOOKUP_CACHED and handle the problem at
> the two callsites.

I still don't get what's weird about the semantics involved, but
the only question I've got is the location of this VFS_BUG_ON().
A way to ensure that we don't forget to check LOOKUP_CACHED early,
in both (seriously similar) callers?

Anyway, it does fix the regression.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-20  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-20  5:40 [PATCH v3] fs: make sure to fail try_to_unlazy() and try_to_unlazy() for LOOKUP_CACHED Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-20  8:58 ` Al Viro [this message]
2025-12-20  9:07   ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-24 12:32 ` Christian Brauner

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=20251220085826.GB1712166@ZenIV \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
    /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