[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1pr7zc4j7.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:11:56 -0800
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...et.ca>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] sysfs: Update s_iattr on link and unlink.
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> writes:
> Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@...ssion.com):
>> From: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>>
>> Currently sysfs updates the timestamps on the vfs directory
>> inode when we create or remove a directory entry but doesn't
>> update the cached copy on the sysfs_dirent, fix that oversight.
>
> confused... why not do this in sysfs_addrm_finish()?
>
> I guess you'd have to do at it at top before dropping sysfs_mutex
> so it wouldn't be as pretty as I was thinking, but at least you
> could just do it once.
Well sysfs_addrm_finish doesn't really know if you did anything.
Beyond that my ultimate goal is to kill sysfs_addrm_start and
sysfs_addrm_finish. Of course that requires fixing all of the
sysfs users that depend on the impossible to get right recursive
directory removal in sysfs, so it is not the subject of this patchset.
Eric
--
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