On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Egads... The problem is real and analysis, AFAICS, is correct, but result
> is extremely ugly ;-/
Agreed.
The problem (or at least one *part* of the problem) is that the "goto
rename_retry" case is done for two different entities entirely:
- the "try_to_ascend()" failure path, which can happen even when
renamelock is held for writing.
- the "if we weren't write-locked before, and the read-lock failed"
case (which obviously cannot happen if we already held things for
writing)
That said, I'm not sure why/how that try_to_ascend() could even fail
when we're holding things locked. I guess it's the DCACHE_DISCONNECTED
case that triggers.
So I'll ignore this series for now, hoping that Al will send a nicer
version. Al, Miklos, please make sure this issue doesn't get dropped
by mistake.
Linus
--
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
