[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YVQCE3vhK8z33Na2@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 08:05:07 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Hou Tao <houtao1@...wei.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Rick Lindsley <ricklind@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernfs: don't create a negative dentry if inactive node
exists
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:04:34AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> In kernfs_iop_lookup() a negative dentry is created if there's no kernfs
> node associated with the dentry or the node is inactive.
>
> But inactive kernfs nodes are meant to be invisible to the VFS and
> creating a negative dentry for these can have unexpected side effects
> when the node transitions to an active state.
>
> The point of creating negative dentries is to avoid the expensive
> alloc/free cycle that occurs if there are frequent lookups for kernfs
> attributes that don't exist. So kernfs nodes that are not yet active
> should not result in a negative dentry being created so when they
> transition to an active state VFS lookups can create an associated
> dentry is a natural way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
> ---
> fs/kernfs/dir.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Does this fix a specific commit and need a "Fixes:" tag?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists