On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 12:46 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue 07-05-19 22:12:57, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 7:19 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > So I'd rather move the fsnotify call to vfs_unlink(), > > > vfs_rmdir(), simple_unlink(), simple_rmdir(), and then those few callers of > > > d_delete() that remain as you suggest elsewhere in this thread. And then we > > > get more consistent context for fsnotify_nameremove() and could just use > > > fsnotify_dirent(). > > > > > > > Yes, I much prefer this solution myself and I will follow up with it, > > but it would not be honest to suggest said solution as a stable fix > > to the performance regression that was introduced in v5.1. > > I think is it better if you choose between lesser evil: > > v1 with ifdef CONFIG_FSNOTIFY to fix build issue > > v2 as subtle as it is > > OR another obviously safe stable fix that you can think of > > OK, fair enough. I'll go with v1 + build fix for current merge window + > stable as it's local to fsnotify_nameremove(). Please note that the patch on your fsnotify branch conflicts with fsnotify_nameremove() changes in master: 230c6402b1b3 ovl_lookup_real_one(): don't bother with strlen() 25b229dff4ff fsnotify(): switch to passing const struct qstr * for file_name Thanks, Amir.
