[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC 19/26] union-mount: Make lookup work for union-mounted file systems
On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:13:42PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
> On union-mounted file systems the lookup function must also visit lower layers
> of the union-stack when doing a lookup. This patches add support for
> union-mounts to cached lookups and real lookups.
> We have 3 different styles of lookup functions now:
> - multiple pathname components, follow mounts, follow union, follow symlinks
> - single pathname component, doesn't follow mounts, follow union, doesn't
> follow symlinks
> - single pathname component doesn't follow mounts, doesn't follow unions,
> doesn't follow symlinks
> +static int hash_lookup_union(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> + struct path *path)
> +{


Looks like there is a lot of code duplication b/n lookup_hash versions and
real_lookup versions for union mounts. Is there a reason for doing it
this way? I believe that with a little effort we should be able to get
rid of the above hash_lookup_union() completely and can instead use
real_lookup_union() variants from lookup_hash() also.

The reason I say this is, I can't see any _real_ difference b/n
real_lookup() and __lookup_hash_kern(). While the former does a seqlock
protected(for concurrent renames) dcache lookup followed by a ->lookup(),
the latter does an extra lock free dcache lookup, followed by seqlock
protected dcache lookup and a ->lookup() on failure.

Do you want me to cook up a patch for this Jan ?

Aside from that, it would help if someone could throw some light on the history
of __lookup_hash_kern. I wonder why real_lookup wasn't be used instead.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-09 07:45    [W:0.252 / U:2.048 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site