From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95953C433B4 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:46:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5948961456 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 16:46:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237244AbhD2Qqx (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:46:53 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42794 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240901AbhD2Qqt (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:46:49 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x135.google.com (mail-lf1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 635F3C06138D for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x135.google.com with SMTP id b23so23295103lfv.8 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:46:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fv1o4ACMgluHoz1tubBqI30O1OAulg9d7QxnCnSiG9c=; b=KDkNvN4NBhwsvv2Vt/X74vt7KVgzUpJkoRwK5HYd1W+ax7k1/dGgufUKiRP3X8w5Ql H5lHQo0imA8GXWxUOZUx++5LlJIaiJwjb17/VyeO+Shqq/nhIWw9KJuVJxGvXm/uTM1x 86MzDL52wXvA28OjsoGhD6CKmP2Q62dV3Gr70= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fv1o4ACMgluHoz1tubBqI30O1OAulg9d7QxnCnSiG9c=; b=I/u/kUY7PDbAmF66cSDuN1hMy5me1i8wIppNA2qbw+5udGAOvQ9D/8cPm5k2tKDMwv uPe8Q4QcYs9+rN7OFoIMMZI44gRwrpskrKcqRC8lLeby4iCnwfkhhoEtr5aF8IO6TOq7 6fkPOFAloksMBGmu7dZrgnnOKpk8BlvpYzK+Ll4BkdJvoq9YQf8CByKRbvLpbpyw8/qG 2f3x3sj5zGElDnq+9ZWdylzy4ise7PWGnzZYDyHCbj3zExX467cQzrAYZ7HBgtYm0yAW K6BvAJYVkMsaKDzOpZ25L+v9E8u8Y9xHQ7unfowsFTnemF4LyHYNfT5so62m9eZ25fh+ dr7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334q2E7bK6gadt6/Ctthjy8XXI6gsIYR1u/0Eu6NWKNp7NM8PD4 CTeLJ+aNQF0KZLcjEBLYAfjLEuhrcto/FIaS X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxJF/cu8r8gU9icjDEa9p0mu7levmIiQ2WGTp39yIDrS26024eyc4KUDoIFIsacCp/Mtd1nxA== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4c4a:: with SMTP id o10mr322199lfk.480.1619714758709; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f43.google.com (mail-lf1-f43.google.com. [209.85.167.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m22sm28068lfh.63.2021.04.29.09.45.55 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f43.google.com with SMTP id h36so51695488lfv.7 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:45:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a90:: with SMTP id m16mr284849lfu.201.1619714755208; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:45:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210427025805.GD3122264@magnolia> <20210427195727.GA9661@lst.de> <20210428061706.GC5084@lst.de> <20210428064110.GA5883@lst.de> <1de23de2-12a9-2b13-3b86-9fe4102fdc0c@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <26d06c27-4778-bf75-e39a-3b02cd22d0e3@rasmusvillemoes.dk> In-Reply-To: <26d06c27-4778-bf75-e39a-3b02cd22d0e3@rasmusvillemoes.dk> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 09:45:39 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] iomap: new code for 5.13-rc1 To: Rasmus Villemoes Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "Darrick J. Wong" , Jia He , Al Viro , linux-fsdevel , linux-xfs , Dave Chinner , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Eric Sandeen , Andy Shevchenko Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:40 PM Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > > > That also does explain the arguably odd %pD defaults: %pd came first, > > and then %pD came afterwards. > > Eh? 4b6ccca701ef5977d0ffbc2c932430dea88b38b6 added them both at the same > time. Ahh, I looked at "git blame", and saw that file_dentry_name() was added later. But that turns out to have been an additional fix on top, not actually "later support". Looking more at that code, I am starting to think that "file_dentry_name()" simply shouldn't use "dentry_name()" at all. Despite that shared code origin, and despite that similar letter choice (lower-vs-upper case), a dentry and a file really are very very different from a name standpoint. And it's not the "a filename is the whale pathname, and a dentry has its own private dentry name" issue. It's really that the 'struct file' contains a _path_ - which is not just the dentry pointer, but the 'struct vfsmount' pointer too. So '%pD' really *could* get the real path right (because it has all the required information) in ways that '%pd' fundamentally cannot. At the same time, I really don't like printk specifiers to take any real locks (ie mount_lock or rename_lock), so I wouldn't want them to use the full d_path() logic. Linus