On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 17:15 -0400, Patrick Donnelly wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > 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 ?
>
> Inode::is_root should work. By the way, I see now that the readdir
> code is also wrong. It should not need to check dn_set at all (just
> is_root()). (It doesn't matter if the directory inode is unlinked, the
> parent is still visible.)
>
Ahh thanks. I'll see about fixing that up while I'm in there too.
Your point about is_root is valid, but I think we should step back a
min and consider how we expect this to work when we mount a subtree of
the MDS root.
Suppose I do:
ceph_mount(&cmount, "/foo/bar/baz");
ceph_lookup(&cmount, "/..", &st);
...what should we ultimately end up stat'ing there? Should I get back
the info for "bar" or "baz" ?
Thanks,
--
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
