> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Introduce path_rename(). Make vfs_rename() static.
> [...]
> > +int path_rename(struct path *old_dir_path, struct dentry *old_dentry,
> > + struct inode *new_dir, struct dentry *new_dentry)
> > +{
> > + int error = mnt_want_write(old_dir_path->mnt);
> > +
> > + if (!error) {
> > + struct inode *old_dir = old_dir_path->dentry->d_inode;
> > +
> > + error = vfs_rename(old_dir, old_dentry, new_dir, new_dentry);
> > + mnt_drop_write(old_dir_path->mnt);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return error;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(path_rename);
>
> You're grabbing a want_write ref on the source vfsmount only. Shouldn't
> path_rename() call mnt_want_write on *both* the source and destination
> vfsmounts?
The source and the destination vfsmounts are always the same.
> If so, do we need to order the locks ala lock_rename()?
These are counters (similar to reference counts), not locks.
Miklos
--
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
