On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 at 02:50, Daniil Lunev <dlunev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Miklos, > Thanks for your response and apologies for my delayed reply. > > > Why the double sign-off? > Some misconfiguration on my side. I will remove the extra line in the > next patch version > > > And this is called for both block and non-block supers. Which means > > that the bdi will be unregistered, yet the sb could still be reused > > (see fuse_test_super()). > > Just to confirm my understanding, fuse_test_super needs to have the > same check as the super.c test_* function, correct? Or make calling retire_super() conditional on sb->s_bdev != NULL. Please only enable this for non-bdev fuse (which is the vast majority of cases) if it's justified. Otherwise it will just be a source of bugs. Thanks, Miklos
