On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Zach Brown wrote:
quoted text
> Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I think rehashing the new dentry is bogus, even on error.
> 
> So we'd just come back through lookup to repopulate the existing
> destination name that vfs_rename_dir() unhashed before calling
> ->rename() in the case that the rename fails?  That seems gross, but
> relatively harmless.

We are talking about an _extremely_ rare event.  Even the
"vfs_rename_dir() with positive target" is very rare, let alone a
failing one.

If we are going to worry about directory removal failure cases, we
should start with rmdir(), which is a wee bit more common, than the
above case here.

Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html