On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 12:55 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Provided that lockref.c is updated accordingly (look at e.g.
> lockref_get_not_zero()).
Yeah, we should likely just make this all a lockref feature.
The dcache is *almost* the only user of lockrefs. We've got them in
gfs2 too, but that looks like it would be perfectly happy with the
same model.
> lockref_get_not_zero() hitting dead dentry is not abnormal,
> so we'd better not complain in such case... BTW, wouldn't that WARN_ON()
> in dget() belong in lockref_get()?
Yeah.
Linus
