[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191115211820.GV26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 21:18:20 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, yu kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
rafael@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, mchehab+samsung@...nel.org,
corbet@....net, tytso@....edu, jmorris@...ei.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
zhengbin13@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
chenxiang66@...ilicon.com, xiexiuqi@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] simple_recursive_removal()
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 07:41:38PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 06:42:09PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > Come to think of that, if we use IS_DEADDIR as "no more additions" marking,
> > that looks like a good candidate for all in-kernel rm -rf on ramfs-style
> > filesystems without cross-directory renames. This bit in kill_it() above
> > if victim is regular
> > __debugfs_file_removed(victim)
> > would be an fs-specific callback passed by the caller, turning the whole
> > thing into this:
>
> Umm... A bit more than that, actually - the callback would be
> void remove_one(struct dentry *victim)
> {
> if (d_is_reg(victim))
> __debugfs_file_removed(victim);
> simple_release_fs(&debugfs_mount, &debugfs_mount_count);
> }
> and the caller would do
> simple_pin_fs(&debug_fs_type, &debugfs_mount, &debugfs_mount_count);
> simple_recursive_removal(dentry, remove_one);
> simple_release_fs(&debugfs_mount, &debugfs_mount_count);
OK... debugfs and tracefs definitely convert to that; so do, AFAICS,
spufs and selinuxfs, and I wouldn't be surprised if it could be
used in a few more places... securityfs, almost certainly qibfs,
gadgetfs looks like it could make use of that. Maybe subrpc
as well, but I'll need to look in details. configfs won't,
unfortunately...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists