From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756695AbYFMUUI (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:20:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753563AbYFMUT4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:19:56 -0400 Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:46369 "EHLO rgminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753509AbYFMUTz (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:19:55 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:19:46 -0700 From: Joel Becker To: Louis Rilling Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3][BUGFIX] configfs: Introduce configfs_dirent_lock Message-ID: <20080613201946.GC20576@mail.oracle.com> Mail-Followup-To: Louis Rilling , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com References: <20080612133126.335618468@kerlabs.com> <20080612134203.763166823@kerlabs.com> <20080612191348.GE5377@mail.oracle.com> <20080612222558.GA4012@localdomain> <20080613024130.GD20581@mail.oracle.com> <20080613104513.GI30804@localhost> <20080613120923.GJ30804@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080613120923.GJ30804@localhost> X-Burt-Line: Trees are cool. X-Red-Smith: Ninety feet between bases is perhaps as close as man has ever come to perfection. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 02:09:23PM +0200, Louis Rilling wrote: > Oh, should probably provide some d_revalidate() also, which would return > -ENOENT for a dentry under a directory flagged with USET_DROPPING. But I'm > realizing that such "inconsistencies" (some default groups being valid in the > d_cache and some other ones not) already happen between the time detach_prep() > has flagged a default group with USET_DROPPING and the default > group is actually detached. Am I wrong? We don't need d_revalidate(). As I stated at the end of my last email, USET_DROPPING does not mean 'It already went away'. It just means we're safe to do so, because we prevent new children. We actually make it go away underneath i_mutex. The VFS handles inconsistencies between lookup and action. It's part of normal operation. Otherwise, they'd have to hold all the i_mutexes around lookup and action. Joel -- "When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." - Mae West Joel Becker Principal Software Developer Oracle E-mail: joel.becker@oracle.com Phone: (650) 506-8127