From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 05 May 2008 13:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [192.26.58.214]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m45Kq3nO028701 for ; Mon, 5 May 2008 13:52:04 -0700 Message-ID: <481F7334.8000408@melbourne.sgi.com> Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 13:51:00 -0700 From: Greg Banks MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Don't use d_alloc_anon for open_by_handle References: <20080501070244.GH108924158@sgi.com> <1209693339-4861-1-git-send-email-xaiki@sgi.com> <20080502060654.GA23912@infradead.org> <20080505095316.GA23934@infradead.org> <20080505184424.GA25933@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20080505184424.GA25933@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Niv Sardi , xfs-dev@sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com, gnb@sgi.com Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 05:53:16AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> It shouldn't be slow. You'd do the equivalent no_subtree check export >> without parent fh, so what we do is call the fh_to_dentry method >> and then call find_acceptable_alias to check if there's already an >> dentry around and if yes use that one. That latter part is what should >> fix your problem. If you want to be lazy you could just copy >> find_acceptable_alias into the xfs code and call it directly and let me >> clean up the mess later.. >> > > Sorry, this was written before my cup of tea in the morning. > find_acceptable_alias is of course a no-op in the no_subtree_check case, > and thus it's identical to what we're currently doing in the handle > code. So any problem you see here will also be seen in an nfs > environment with no_subtree_check, which is the sensible choise Agreed. > and > I think even the default these days. I believe so. We also use that as default on our shipping NAS servers anyway. > So we'd better fix the lacking > expiry in the core code. Mmm, sounds like fun. > Cc'ing Greg as he's been fighting this code > quite a bit in the past. > > Thanks. I'm on xfs-dev now so I've been lurking while you guys discussed this :-) -- Greg Banks, P.Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. The cake is *not* a lie. I don't speak for SGI.