On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 04:19:02PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > I have made an analysis of callers to d_delete() and found that all callers > either hold parent inode lock or name is stable for another reason: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20190104090357.GD22409@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > But Jan preferred to keep take_dentry_name_snapshot() to be safe. > I think the right thing to do is assert that parent inode is locked or > no rename op in d_delete() and take the lock in ceph/ocfs2 to conform > to the standard. Any messing with the locking in ceph_fill_trace() would have to come with very detailed proof of correctness, convincingly stable wrt future changes in ceph...
