On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Zach Brown wrote: > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > I think rehashing the new dentry is bogus, even on error. > > So we'd just come back through lookup to repopulate the existing > destination name that vfs_rename_dir() unhashed before calling > ->rename() in the case that the rename fails? That seems gross, but > relatively harmless. We are talking about an _extremely_ rare event. Even the "vfs_rename_dir() with positive target" is very rare, let alone a failing one. If we are going to worry about directory removal failure cases, we should start with rmdir(), which is a wee bit more common, than the above case here. 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
