[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180506213247.GM30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 May 2018 22:32:47 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
Cc: Martin Steigerwald <martin@...htvoll.de>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, dsterba@...e.cz,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
Debian m68k <debian-68k@...ts.debian.org>
Subject: Re: moving affs + RDB partition support to staging?
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 09:46:23PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> I'm fixing that pile of crap (along with the NFS exports
> one and, hopefully, rename mess as well). HOWEVER, I am not going
> to take over the damn thing - David has violated the 11th
> commandment (Thou Shalt Never Volunteer), so he gets to joy of
> learning that codebase and taking care of it from now on.
Same scenario on link(2) ends up with
* ST_LINKFILE created, inserted into the link chain and left around,
without being present in any hash chain
* target becoming positive hashed dentry, as if link(2) has succeeded,
so dcache lookups will be finding it (for a while)
* unlink(2) on source will have very interesting effects, what with
the attempts to move ST_FILE entry into the directory presumed to
contain ST_LINKFILE one, removing ST_LINKFILE from it at the same time.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists