On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 03:49:50AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > Shifting increment from mnt_set_mountpoint() and commit_tree() > to theirs callers and collapsing where possible, we get the following: > * decrement in release_mounts() when resetting ->mnt_parent > * increment in propagate_mnt() after call of mnt_set_mountpoint() > * decrement in attach_recursive_mnt() in the loop calling > commit_tree() for clones (on mountpoint of each clone). > * increment in umount_tree() at the point where we update d_mounted. ... except that it'd give a leak in case of mount to shared mountpoint failing halfway through - we'll get double increments since umount_tree() would hit the mountpoints of cloned trees with extra increment, even though reference from root of cloned to its mountpoint is _already_ a ghost. OTOH, we probably don't want to bother with counting those anyway - i.e. it's simply a bad definition and the right one would be along the lines of "number of vfsmounts that are doomed to be eaten by release_mounts() and that have ->mnt_parent pointing to us". IOW, dropping the 2nd and 3rd in the above would do the right thing - anything chewed by umount_tree() *will* go to release_mounts() and ones in flight are what we are interested in... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
