On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 01:28:07PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
Umm... I don't see problems with doing that, but I hope you realize that
the notion of "ever having that name" is not the same as "pathnam resolution
on that name ever leading to that file" - path_walk() is *NOT* atomic
wrt rename() (or mount --move, indeed) and it's quite possible to walk
into subdirectory, have it moved under you, then see .. as the next pathname
component and step out into new parent.
Said that, it makes sense to avoid dropping/regaining the lock in that
case - it's less work and I don't believe that it would increase contention
on vfsmount_lock. So I'm applying that one, just be careful with assumptions
about consistency, etc. in the general area.
--