lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: sanitize __d_path()
    From
    On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
    > On Thu, 27 May 2010, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
    >> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
    >> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
    >> >
    >> > __d_path() no longer appends " (deleted)" to unlinked paths.  This is
    >> > moved into d_path() which is the only caller that cares.
    >>
    >> d_path() or equivalent should get "int *deleted" argument to distinguish
    >> really deleted files. Then users can decide if they care or not.
    >
    > Why can't they distinguish deleted files by just calling d_unlinked()?

    Why would they want to do it (which means taking locks again and
    potential incoherence)?
    The information is right there, ship it upwards:

    + if (deleted)
    + *deleted = 0;
    spin_lock(&vfsmount_lock);
    prepend(&end, &buflen, "\0", 1);
    - if (d_unlinked(dentry) &&
    - (prepend(&end, &buflen, " (deleted)", 10) != 0))
    - goto Elong;
    + if (d_unlinked(dentry) && deleted)
    + *deleted = 1;

    "(deleted)" as interface sucks, we can't change it,
    at least, let's make in-kernel interface correct.
    --
    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: 2010-05-27 15:23    [W:0.021 / U:58.580 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site