lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 11 May 2004 00:09:25 +0530
FromDipankar Sarma <>
SubjectRe: dentry bloat.
On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 11:17:12PM +0100, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 09:03:16PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> 
> > Actually, what may happen is that since the dentries are added
> > in the front, a double move like that would result in hash chain
> > traversal looping. Timing dependent and unlikely, but d_move_count
> > avoided that theoritical possibility. It is not about skipping
> > dentries which is safe because a miss would result in a real_lookup()
> 
> Not really.  A miss could result in getting another dentry allocated
> for the same e.g. directory, which is *NOT* harmless at all.

AFAICS, a miss in __d_lookup would result in a repeat lookup
under dcache_lock in which case we are safe or real_lookup()
which in turn does another lookup with dcache_lock. Is there
a path that I am missing here ?

Thanks
Dipankar
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2008