![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote: > > The negative dentry wouldn't normally be a problem, even though it's > > attached to its parent directory... except for the small matter that it's > > subsequently listed in a directory read operation. > > Surely this dentry should also be unhashed at some point. > Wouldn't that be a sensible result of the failed operation? Why? The lookup op succeeded, so obviously there wasn't anything there, right? Note that nfs_lookup_revalidate() doesn't cause the dentry to be revalidated because the mtime on the parent directory hasn't changed. I'm considering having nfs_readdir_lookup() mark a negative dentry it encounters as named in a directory listing for explicit revalidation, but I can't call nfs_mark_for_revalidate() since I don't have an inode. I think I'll need to add a dentry flag for this purpose. David - 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: 2006-08-16 15:23 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||