On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 05:52:51PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'd probably just do this, and to hell with helper functions... > > > > int d_set_mounted(struct dentry *dentry) > > { > > struct dentry *p; > > int ret = 0; > > write_seqlock(&rename_lock); > > for (p = dentry; !IS_ROOT(p); p = p->d_parent) { > > /* Need exclusion wrt. check_submounts_and_drop() */ > > spin_lock(&p->d_lock); > > if (unlikely(d_unhashed(p))) { > > spin_unlock(&p->d_lock); > > ret = -ENOENT; > > goto out; > > } > > spin_unlock(&p->d_lock); > > } > > spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock); > > dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_MOUNTED; > > spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock); > > out: > > write_sequnlock(&rename_lock); > > return ret; > > } > > One issue with that: the dentry should be checked and marked within > the same d_locked region. Because e.g. d_invalidate() relies solely > on d_lock for non-dir mounts and d_mountpoint() checking, no > rename_lock protection there. Point... OK, could you check if vfs.git#for-miklos looks sane now? It should be at cf7543f... -- 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