On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 01:55:06PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > >I'm not sure I like mixing rcu_read_lock() into that - d_path() and friends > >can do that themselves just fine (it needs to be taken when seq is even), > >and e.g. d_walk() doesn't need it at all. Other than that, I'm OK with > >this variant. > > I think rcu_read_lock() is needed to make sure that the dentry won't > be freed as we don't take d_lock now.
Sure, you do need that; the question is whether you need to take it in the primitives you are introducing. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
