On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 04:12:29PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Wed, 2024-03-20 at 14:42 +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > int vfs_mknod(struct mnt_idmap *, struct inode *, struct dentry *, > > > - umode_t, dev_t); > > > + umode_t, dev_t, struct inode **); > > > > So we will have at least the following helpers with an additional > > delegated inode argument. > > > > vfs_unlink() > > vfs_link() > > notify_change() > > vfs_create() > > vfs_mknod() > > vfs_mkdir() > > vfs_rmdir() > > > > From looking at callers all these helpers will be called with non-NULL > > delegated inode argument in vfs only. Unless it is generally conceivable > > that other callers will want to pass a non-NULL inode argument over time > > it might make more sense to add vfs_<operation>_delegated() or > > __vfs_<operation>() and make vfs_mknod() and friends exported wrappers > > around it. > > > > I mean it's a matter of preference ultimately but this seems cleaner to > > me. So at least for the new ones we should consider it. Would also make > > the patch smaller. > > > > Good suggestion. I just respun along those lines and it's a lot cleaner. > I'm still testing it but here is the new diffstat. It's a little larger > actually, but it keeps the changes more confined to namei.c: Sounds good to me!
