Re: [RFC] a possible way of reducing the PITA of ->d_name audits

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Sun, 7 Sept 2025 at 13:32, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
>         I would like to discuss a flagday change to calling conventions
> of ->create()/->unlink()/->rename()/etc. - all directory methods.
> It would have no impact on the code generation, it would involve
> quite a bit of localized churn and it would allow to deal with catching
> ->d_name races on compiler level.

Can you make this more concrete by actually sending an example patch.

Well, two patches: first the patch for the "claim_stability" helper
type and functions, and then a separate patch for converting _one_ of
the users (eg 'symlink').

Because I have a hard time visualizing just how noisy the result would
be (and whether it would be legible end result).

And I do wonder if it might not be simpler to have a model where
filesystems always get a stable dentry name - either because we hold
the parent lock on a VFS level (fairly common, I think), or because we
pass a separate copy to the filesystem

You did that with the d_revalidate() callback, and I think that was a
clear success. Can we extend on *that* pattern, perhaps?

            Linus