On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:43:03PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> + if (!d_can_lookup(parent))
> >> + return -ENOENT;
> >
> > And how, pray tell, would a parent of anything fail to be a directory?
>
> It is to make that function be visually distinct from path_parentat
> which does something rather different.
Huh? I'm asking how can that condition ever turn out to be true. Unless
you really advocate something like
if (2 * 17 != 34)
return -234567; // to make it visually distinct from foobar(),
// which doesn't have such a test
your reply doesn't seem to make any sense...
> >> + this.name = "pts";
> >> + this.len = 3;
> >> + this.hash = full_name_hash(this.name, this.len);
> >> + if (parent->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_HASH) {
> >> + int err = parent->d_op->d_hash(parent, &this);
> >> + if (err < 0)
> >> + return err;
> >> + }
> >> + inode_lock(parent->d_inode);
> >
> > What the hell for? What does that lock on parent change for the
> > dcache lookup you are doing here?
>
> Good point. That is overkill. As we know the dentry is a mount point and
> must be in the dcache, the customary lock for performing a lookup from
> the disk is not necessary.
Er... To avoid reader confusion:
a) d_lookup() does *not* do a filesystem lookup
b) it does not need inode_lock()
c) it (and not a "lookup from the disk") is what's actually being
called in the code in question.
