Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:10:06 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/10] sysfs tagged directories |
| |
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com> writes:
> Ah I see it, thanks.
Serge thanks for your productive and detailed reply to this.
> The last question of Al's which went unanswered was > >> Excuse me, _what_? Are you seriously suggesting going through all dentry >> trees, doing d_move() in each? I want to see your locking. It's promising >> to be worse than devfs had ever been. Much worse. > > I think this is answered in patch 4. So yeah, it does d_move() in each > sysfs mount. It's all done under the sysfs_rename_mutex. Judging by > the phrasing of the question, is that not acceptable?
We also have to call sysfs_grab_supers to ensure none of the superblocks we know about will go away during the rename. I believe that is the only locking change from the current code.
Eric
| |