On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > __d_path() no longer appends " (deleted)" to unlinked paths. This is
>> > moved into d_path() which is the only caller that cares.
>>
>> d_path() or equivalent should get "int *deleted" argument to distinguish
>> really deleted files. Then users can decide if they care or not.
>
> Why can't they distinguish deleted files by just calling d_unlinked()?
Why would they want to do it (which means taking locks again and
potential incoherence)?
The information is right there, ship it upwards:
+ if (deleted)
+ *deleted = 0;
spin_lock(&vfsmount_lock);
prepend(&end, &buflen, "\0", 1);
- if (d_unlinked(dentry) &&
- (prepend(&end, &buflen, " (deleted)", 10) != 0))
- goto Elong;
+ if (d_unlinked(dentry) && deleted)
+ *deleted = 1;
"(deleted)" as interface sucks, we can't change it,
at least, let's make in-kernel interface correct.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
