> On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > I kept the dget/put out caution and ignorance, but they're clearly
> > problematic. I'm happy to drop them if holding dcache_lock is enough
> > to keep the tree stable while I traverse it.
> How does this patch look to you people?
> It's untested, but looks fairly obvious. It removes the increment, and
> changes autofs4_expire() to properly bump the count of the returned dentry
> (and callers will dput() it when done). This may be unnecessarily careful,
> but it's the RightThing(tm) to do.
Looks sane for me. However, I would add check for dentry being hashed and
would skip the unhashed ones. Otherwise you can get a directory that
had been removed but is still busy - doesn't look like a right thing to
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/