Tejun Heo <[email protected]> writes:
> Hello, all.
>
> This is subset of Eric W. Biederman's "Sysfs cleanups & tagged
> directory support" patchset[1] with the following modifications.
As a base:
Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <[email protected]>
>
> * fix-i_mutex-locking-in-sysfs_get_dentry patch is added at the top
> and #14-Don_t-use-lookup_one_len_kern and
> #15-vfs-Remove-lookup_one_len_kern are dropped. This is because #14
> contained had a bug where it might created dentry/inode for an
> already deleted sysfs_dirent. I think it's benefitial to keep
> single lookup path.
I think I disagree with the bug spotting.
At least in net we the sysfs_rename_mutex which keeps parent
directories from disappearing. Further we have a reference
to the leaf sysfs_dirent and are actively manipulating it, so
the sysfs_dirent should not disappear on us.
> * Rewrote simplify-sysfs_get_dentry patch and
> #08-Implement-__sysfs_get_dentry,
> #09-Move-sysfs_get_dentry-below-__sysfs_get_dentry and
> #10-Rewrite-sysfs_get_dentry-in-terms-of-__sysfs_get_dentry are
> omitted as __sysfs_get_dentry() isn't used by anyone.
Right. __sysfs_get_dentry is an optimization that has makes
the best case for sysfs_get_dentry O(1) instead of O(depth).
However this doesn't matter because sysfs_get_dentry is not
on any fast path and the maximum depth of sysfs directories
is fairly shallow and programmer controlled.
The only user other user of __sysfs_get_dentry is in the tagged
directory support, and even that user doesn't strictly need it.
Although it is a bit silly to populate the dcache just so you
can invalidate it a moment later...
Just doing the dget(sysfs_sb->s_root) is a bit clearer in
sysfs_get_dentry then knowing implicitly that is what
__sysfs_get_dentry does in the worst cased.
> * #16, 19-25 are omitted as it isn't clear yet how the tagged entry
> support will end up.
>
> * readdir simplification fixed.
>
> * sysfs_mutex double locking fixed.
>
> The patchset is on top of the current -gregkh.
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
