From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: why is short-circuiting nfs_lookup() for mkdir(2) et.al. dependent upon v3 or later?
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 00:48:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YGJ1UyTYumVZCa8v@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In nfs_lookup() we have
/*
* If we're doing an exclusive create, optimize away the lookup
* but don't hash the dentry.
*/
if (nfs_is_exclusive_create(dir, flags) || flags & LOOKUP_RENAME_TARGET)
return NULL;
OK, fair enough - we don't need to find out whether it's negative or not for
mkdir() et.al.; if it isn't, server will tell us to sod off and we can live
with not having it in cache - in the worst case, we'll have to do the same
lookup we'd skipped here at some later point. Same for rename(2) destination -
if it wasn't in dcache, we are not going to bother with sillyrename anyway, and
that's the only thing where we might care about the destination. If rename(2)
succeeds, we won't see whatever had been there anyway, and if it fails, we won't
lose anything from having lookup done later.
What I don't get is why, unlike rename(2) target, mkdir(2) argument is
handled that way only for v3 and later. It's been a long time since I looked
at NFSv2 servers, but shouldn't we get NFSERR_EXIST if the sucker turns out to
have already been there?
What am I missing?
next reply other threads:[~2021-03-30 0:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-30 0:48 Al Viro [this message]
2021-03-30 11:43 ` why is short-circuiting nfs_lookup() for mkdir(2) et.al. dependent upon v3 or later? Trond Myklebust
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=YGJ1UyTYumVZCa8v@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.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