[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1NGDUe-0003BX-Bf@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:21:20 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, jlayton@...hat.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jamie@...reable.org, pavel@....cz, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
duaneg@...da.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] vfs: force reval on dentry of bind mounted files on FS_REVAL_DOT filesystems
On Thu, 03 Dec 2009, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Ah. I thought you were thinking about the mandatory have_submounts()
> check in dentry->d_op->d_revalidate().
>
> I expect the generic d_invalidate will simply hit the:
> spin_lock(&dcache_lock);
> if (d_unhashed(dentry)) {
> spin_unlock(&dcache_lock);
> return 0;
> }
>
> After the distributed filesystem has called d_drop in
> dentry->d_op->d_revalidate (when appropriate.
Ah, right, NFS's d_revalidate does do d_drop(). Okay, I have no
problem with the patch, as long as path lookup performance doesn't
show a regression.
Thanks,
Miklos
--
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