On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:11:29AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> Once d_move() has happened, there's nothing to protect the old parent
> anymore... Granted, it's a hell of a narrow race window, but you
> need at least ->d_lock on your dentry...
Right, got it. So the following should be safe according to the
dcache locking protocols, right?
while (ext4_test_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_NEWENTRY)) {
ext4_clear_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_NEWENTRY);
dentry = NULL;
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
if (!list_empty(&inode->i_dentry)) {
dentry = list_first_entry(&inode->i_dentry,
struct dentry, d_alias);
dget(dentry);
}
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
if (!dentry)
break;
next = igrab(dentry->d_parent->d_inode);
dput(dentry);
if (!next)
break;
iput(inode);
inode = next;
...
Let me know if I've missed anything....
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
