[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0806030926330.3473@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 09:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, jesper@...gh.cc,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.26-rc4
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Ian Kent wrote:
>
> The code we're talking about deals with a race between expiring and
> mounting an autofs mount point at the same time.
>
> I'll have a closer look and see if I can make it work without turning
> the dentry negative.
Hmm.
Can you walk me through this?
If the dentry is unhashed, it means that it _either_
- has already been deleted (rmdir'ed) or d_invalidate()'d. Right?
I don't see why you should ever return the dentry in this case..
- or it has not yet been hashed at all
But then d_inode should be NULL too, no?
Anyway, as far as I can tell, you should handle the race between expiring
and re-mounting not by unhashing at expire time (which causes these kinds
of problems), but by setting a bit in the dentry and using the dentry
"revalidate()" callback to wait for the revalidate.
But I don't know autofs4, so you probably have some reason. Could you
explain it?
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists