Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:04:23 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] First casuality of hlist poisoning in 2.5.70 | From | Trond Myklebust <> |
| |
>>>>> " " == Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:
> But I suspect that neither dentry nor target should really ever > be unhashed by the time we call d_move(). That's reinforced by > the fact that it looks like a unhashed dentry in d_move() would > have been a silent bug previously - staying unhashed if it just > shared the bucket.
It is not a bug.
Looking more carefully at the Oops, it seems that this problem is occurring inside an nfs_rename() in which the target name belongs to an open file - and thus needs to be sillyrenamed first.
In that case, we certainly do not want to rehash the dentry in order to do the d_move() since that would give rise to a race: we want to do a real rename into the same dentry after we're done with the sillyrename.
I can agree that the patch was flawed, but I still believe that we do need to allow d_move to work with unhashed dentries.
Cheers, Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |