On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 06:54:08AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > Umm... I would be very surprised if it turned out to be a problem.
> > nfsd really doesn't give a fuck about its cwd and root - not in the
> > thread side of things. And (un)exporting is (a) not on a hot path
> > and (b) not done from a kernel thread anyway. fh_to_dentry and friends
> > doesn't care about root/cwd, etc.
> >
> > I don't see anything that could cause that kind of issues.
>
> I like the change overall -- it would certainly make my patch series
> simpler, but what about pathwalking? We do take the fs->lock in
> unlazy_walk. Is it possible we'd end up with more contention there?
That would take a pathname lookup in kernel thread side of nfsd that
* isn't single-component
* isn't LOOKUP_ROOT one (i.e. vfs_path_lookup() or file_open_root())
and I would really hope we don't have such things. Any such a beast would
allow probing the tree layout outside of what we export, to start with...
AFAICS, we really don't have anything of that sort. Note that e.g.
lookup_one_len() doesn't go anywhere near ->fs->lock...
--
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/
