On Fri 04-10-24 05:14:36, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 09:21:19AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > But screwing with LSM instructure looks .... obnoxiously complex > > > from the outside... > > > > Imho, please just focus on the immediate feedback and ignore all the > > extra bells and whistles that we could or should do. I prefer all of > > that to be done after this series lands. > > For the LSM mess: absolutely. For fsnotify it seems like Dave has > a good idea to integrate it, and it removes the somewhat awkward > need for the reffed flag. So if that delayed notify idea works out > I'd prefer to see that in over the flag. As I wrote in one of the emails in this (now huge) thread, I'm fine with completely dropping that inode->i_refcount check from the fsnotify_unmount_inodes(). It made sense when it was called before evict_inodes() but after 1edc8eb2e931 ("fs: call fsnotify_sb_delete after evict_inodes") the usefulness of this check is rather doubtful. So we can drop the awkward flag regardless whether we unify evict_inodes() with fsnotify_unmount_inodes() or not. I have no strong preference whether the unification happens as part of this patch set or later on so it's up to Dave as far as I'm concerned. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR