Re: [PATCH 1/3][BUGFIX] configfs: Introduce configfs_dirent_lock

[Joel Becker]

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@xxxxxxxxxx
Phone: (650) 506-8127
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/