From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=wfQU=S6=vger.kernel.org=linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham 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 C3471C43219
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 04:38:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F68206E0
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 04:38:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1726359AbfD1Ei0 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 28 Apr 2019 00:38:26 -0400
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:33944 "EHLO
        ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1725909AbfD1Ei0 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 28 Apr 2019 00:38:26 -0400
Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux))
        id 1hKbZs-0007cv-JT; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 04:38:13 +0000
Date:   Sun, 28 Apr 2019 05:38:12 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph fixes for 5.1-rc7
Message-ID: <20190428043801.GE2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20190425174739.27604-1-idryomov@gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgPBx9xPWY7obK60=RTnOF3Ln0j9XkhYbekML=Fi3bFXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <342ef35feb1110197108068d10e518742823a210.camel@kernel.org>
 <20190425200941.GW2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <86674e79e9f24e81feda75bc3c0dd4215604ffa5.camel@kernel.org>
 <20190426165055.GY2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <b175faae4bb98d3379a8642fe5f4e00587c3a734.camel@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b175faae4bb98d3379a8642fe5f4e00587c3a734.camel@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 01:30:53PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:

> > I _probably_ would take allocation out of the loop (e.g. make it
> > __getname(), called unconditionally) and turned it into the
> > d_path.c-style read_seqbegin_or_lock()/need_seqretry()/done_seqretry()
> > loop, so that the first pass would go under rcu_read_lock(), while
> > the second (if needed) would just hold rename_lock exclusive (without
> > bumping the refcount).  But that's a matter of (theoretical) livelock
> > avoidance, not the locking correctness for ->d_name accesses.
> > 
> 
> Yeah, that does sound better. I want to think about this code a bit

FWIW, is there any reason to insist that the pathname is put into the
beginning of the buffer?  I mean, instead of path + pathlen we might
return path + offset, with the pathname going from path + offset to
path + PATH_MAX - 1 inclusive, with path being the thing eventually
freed.

It's easier to build the string backwards, seeing that we are walking
from leaf to root...