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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 00762C43460 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 03:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA54761441 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 03:21:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230263AbhD3DWc (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:22:32 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41426 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230097AbhD3DWX (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:22:23 -0400 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk (zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2607:5300:60:148a::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D2BDC06138E; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 20:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lcJia-009Rdo-M6; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 03:21:28 +0000 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 03:21:28 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Justin He Cc: Linus Torvalds , Rasmus Villemoes , Christoph Hellwig , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-fsdevel , linux-xfs , Dave Chinner , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Eric Sandeen , Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] iomap: new code for 5.13-rc1 Message-ID: References: <20210428061706.GC5084@lst.de> <20210428064110.GA5883@lst.de> <1de23de2-12a9-2b13-3b86-9fe4102fdc0c@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <26d06c27-4778-bf75-e39a-3b02cd22d0e3@rasmusvillemoes.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 03:17:02AM +0000, Justin He wrote: > Is it a good idea to introduce a new d_path_nolock() for file_dentry_name()? > In d_path_nolock(), if it detects that there is conflicts with mount_lock > or rename_lock, then returned NULL as a name of that vfsmount? Just what does vfsmount have to do with rename_lock? And what's the point of the entire mess, anyway?