On Sun, 11 Jun 2023 at 19:52, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is it because getting f_real_path() and file_dentry() via d_real() > is more expensive? > and caching this information in file_fake container would be > more efficient? > > I will restore the file_fake container and post v3. I simply dislike the fact that ->d_real() is getting more complex. I'd prefer d_real to die, which is unfortunately not so easy, as you've explained. But if we can make it somewhat less complex (remove the inode parameter) instead of more complex (add a vfsmount * parameter) then that's already a big win in my eyes. Thanks, Miklos
