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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site