On Sun, 12 May 2024 at 12:59, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> So the children are already unreachable through that name, and can
> only be reached through somebody who still has the directory open. And
> I do not see how "rmdir()" can *possibly* have any valid semantic
> effect on any user that has that directory as its PWD, so I claim that
> the dentries that exist at this point must already not be relevant
> from a semantic standpoint.
Side note: our IS_DEADDIR() checks seem a bit inconsistent.
That's actually what should catch some of the "I'm an a directory that
has been removed", but we have that check in lookup_open(), in
lookup_one_qstr_excl(), and in __lookup_slow().
I wonder if we should check it in lookup_dcache() too?
Because yes, that's a difference that rmdir makes, in how it sets
S_DEAD, and this seems to be an area where existing cached dentries
are handled differently.
Linus
