Re: [PATCH 26/41] union-mount: stop lookup when finding a whiteout

From: Erez Zadok
Date: Mon Nov 30 2009 - 23:12:23 EST


In message <1256152779-10054-27-git-send-email-vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx>, Valerie Aurora writes:
> From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx>
>
> Stop the lookup if we find a whiteout during union path lookup.

Was it intentional to have a separate patch which adds opaque directories
support, or should it be part of the larger patch #24?

> Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/namei.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
> index 8ebbf4f..fb463ac 100644
> --- a/fs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/namei.c
> @@ -442,10 +442,10 @@ static int __cache_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> path->dentry = dentry;
> path->mnt = dentry ? nd->path.mnt : NULL;
>
> - if (!dentry || dentry->d_inode)
> + if (!dentry || (dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(dentry)))
> return !dentry;

Unnecessary set of () around second and third || clauses above.

>
> - /* look for the first non-negative dentry */
> + /* look for the first non-negative or whiteout dentry */
>
> while (follow_union_down(&nd->path.mnt, &nd->path.dentry)) {
> dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(nd->path.dentry, name);
> @@ -467,7 +467,7 @@ static int __cache_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> goto out_dput;
> }
>
> - if (dentry->d_inode)
> + if (dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(dentry))
> goto out_dput;
>
> dput(dentry);
> @@ -505,6 +505,11 @@ static int __cache_lookup_build_union(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> return 1;
> }
>
> + if (d_is_whiteout(dentry)) {
> + dput(dentry);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> if (!dentry->d_inode) {
> dput(dentry);
> continue;
> @@ -716,7 +721,6 @@ out_unlock:
> * type mismatch and whiteouts.
> *
> * FIXME:
> - * - handle DT_WHT

Ah, ok: so this patch adds DT_WHT support. Still, I don't see why it can't
just be folded into the already pretty large patch #24; and maybe patch 24
could be split a different way to facilitated easier reviewing?

> * - handle union stacks in use
> * - handle union stacks mounted upon union stacks
> * - avoid unnecessary allocations of union locks
> @@ -731,7 +735,7 @@ static int __real_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> - if (path->dentry->d_inode)
> + if (path->dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(path->dentry))
> return 0;
>
> while (follow_union_down(&nd->path.mnt, &nd->path.dentry)) {
> @@ -747,7 +751,7 @@ static int __real_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> - if (next.dentry->d_inode) {
> + if (next.dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(next.dentry)) {
> dput(path->dentry);
> mntget(next.mnt);
> *path = next;
> @@ -790,6 +794,11 @@ static int __real_lookup_build_union(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> + if (d_is_whiteout(next.dentry)) {
> + dput(next.dentry);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> if (!next.dentry->d_inode) {
> dput(next.dentry);
> continue;
> @@ -1610,7 +1619,7 @@ static int __hash_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> - if (path->dentry->d_inode)
> + if (path->dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(path->dentry))
> return 0;
>
> while (follow_union_down(&nd->path.mnt, &nd->path.dentry)) {
> @@ -1628,7 +1637,7 @@ static int __hash_lookup_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> - if (next.dentry->d_inode) {
> + if (next.dentry->d_inode || d_is_whiteout(next.dentry)) {
> dput(path->dentry);
> mntget(next.mnt);
> *path = next;
> @@ -1666,6 +1675,11 @@ static int __hash_lookup_build_union(struct nameidata *nd, struct qstr *name,
> if (err)
> goto out;
>
> + if (d_is_whiteout(next.dentry)) {
> + dput(next.dentry);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> if (!next.dentry->d_inode) {
> dput(next.dentry);
> continue;
> --
> 1.6.3.3
>
> --
> 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

Erez.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/