Re: [PATCH 1/2] VFS: change kern_path_locked() and user_path_locked_at() to never return negative dentry

[Kent Overstreet]

On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 05:34:23PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Feb 2025, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 03:53:52PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > Do you think there could be a problem with changing the error returned
> > > in this circumstance? i.e. if you try to destroy a subvolume with a
> > > non-existant name on a different filesystem could getting -ENOENT
> > > instead of -EXDEV be noticed?
> > 
> > -EXDEV is the standard error code for "we're crossing a filesystem
> > boundary and we can't or aren't supposed to be", so no, let's not change
> > that.
> > 
> 
> OK.  As bcachefs is the only user of user_path_locked_at() it shouldn't
> be too hard.

Hang on, why does that require keeping user_path_locked_at()? Just
compare i_sb...