On 2/20/23 20:37, Alexander Mikhalitsyn wrote:
We don't want to send FUSE_FORGET request to the new
fuse daemon if inode was lookuped by the old fuse daemon
because it can confuse and break userspace (libfuse).
For now, just add a new argument to fuse_queue_forget and
handle it. Adjust all callers to match the old behaviour.
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Stéphane Graber <stgraber@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Seth Forshee <sforshee@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: criu@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Alexander Mikhalitsyn <aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/fuse/dev.c | 4 ++--
fs/fuse/dir.c | 8 ++++----
fs/fuse/fuse_i.h | 2 +-
fs/fuse/inode.c | 2 +-
4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fuse/dev.c b/fs/fuse/dev.c
index eb4f88e3dc97..85f69629f34d 100644
--- a/fs/fuse/dev.c
+++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ __releases(fiq->lock)
}
void fuse_queue_forget(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_forget_link *forget,
- u64 nodeid, u64 nlookup)
+ u64 nodeid, u64 nlookup, bool stale_inode_conn)
{
struct fuse_iqueue *fiq = &fc->iq;
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ void fuse_queue_forget(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_forget_link *forget,
forget->forget_one.nlookup = nlookup;
spin_lock(&fiq->lock);
- if (fiq->connected) {
+ if (fiq->connected && !stale_inode_conn) {
fiq->forget_list_tail->next = forget;
fiq->forget_list_tail = forget;
fiq->ops->wake_forget_and_unlock(fiq);
I'm not sure about kernel coding rules here - for me that is unlikely
rare event - I would have added unlikely() here.
