On Fri, 2025-02-21 at 10:36 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> ceph already splices the correct dentry (in splice_dentry()) from the
> result of mkdir but does nothing more with it.
>
> Now that ->mkdir can return a dentry, return the correct dentry.
>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ceph/dir.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/dir.c b/fs/ceph/dir.c
> index 39e0f240de06..c1a1c168bb27 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/dir.c
> @@ -1099,6 +1099,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_mkdir(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct inode *dir,
> struct ceph_client *cl = mdsc->fsc->client;
> struct ceph_mds_request *req;
> struct ceph_acl_sec_ctx as_ctx = {};
> + struct dentry *ret = NULL;
I believe that it makes sense to initialize pointer by error here and always
return ret as output. If something goes wrong in the logic, then we already have
error.
> int err;
> int op;
>
> @@ -1166,14 +1167,20 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_mkdir(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct inode *dir,
> !req->r_reply_info.head->is_dentry)
> err = ceph_handle_notrace_create(dir, dentry);
> out_req:
> + if (!err && req->r_dentry != dentry)
> + /* Some other dentry was spliced in */
> + ret = dget(req->r_dentry);
> ceph_mdsc_put_request(req);
> out:
> if (!err)
> + /* Should this use 'ret' ?? */
Could we make a decision should or shouldn't? :)
It looks not good to leave this comment instead of proper implementation. Do we
have some obstacles to make this decision?
> ceph_init_inode_acls(d_inode(dentry), &as_ctx);
> else
> d_drop(dentry);
> ceph_release_acl_sec_ctx(&as_ctx);
> - return ERR_PTR(err);
> + if (err)
> + return ERR_PTR(err);
> + return ret;
What's about this?
return err ? ERR_PTR(err) : ret;
Thanks,
Slava.
> }
>
> static int ceph_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
