On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 16:46 -0400, Patrick Donnelly wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 16:08 -0400, Patrick Donnelly wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The CEPH_INO_DOTDOT thing is quite strange. Under most OS (Linux
> > > > included), the parent of the root is itself. IOW, at the root, '.'
> > > > and
> > > > '..' refer to the same inode.
> > > >
> > > > Change the ceph client to do the same, as this allows users to get
> > > > valid stat info for '..', as well as elimnating some special-
> > > > casing.
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Don't forget Client::_lookup:
> > >
> > > if (dname == "..") {
> > > if (dir->dn_set.empty())
> > > r = -ENOENT;
> > > else
> > > *target = dir->get_first_parent()->dir->parent_inode; //dirs
> > > can't be hard-linked
> > > goto done;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Otherwise LGTM.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Ahh, thanks. So will dir->dn_set.empty() be true at the root? If so,
> > then something like the patch below?
>
> Well, that's tricky actually. My understanding is that if dn_set is
> empty then either the inode is unlinked or it is the root inode (from
> the client's perspective). So the below patch is probably not quite
> right? I think if the directory is unlinked but not the root, its ".."
> should still refer to its first parent? The ENOENT error is probably
> wrong.
>
Ok, so is there some way to reliably tell whether it's the root? Should
we instead check whether it's inode number is CEPH_INO_ROOT ?
> >
> > Note that this patch is not strictly necessary, but it does simplify
> > some other changes that I have queued up:
>
> I think the patch is a good change but there may be some other code
> paths that need fixed. This change needs some simple tests.
>
Yeah, agreed. I'll plan to add some if this patch is reasonable. I just
wanted to float the patch out here as an RFC first, in case I was
missing some reason that we needed to keep CEPH_INO_DOTDOT.
Thanks for having a look!
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
