Date:   Sat, 18 Feb 2023 17:55:19 +0900
From:   asmadeus@codewreck.org
To:     Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@kernel.org>
Cc:     v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, rminnich@gmail.com,
        lucho@ionkov.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux_oss@crudebyte.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] fs/9p: Fix revalidate
Message-ID: <Y/CSd2oYO9dBbVUH@codewreck.org>
References: <20230124023834.106339-1-ericvh@kernel.org>
 <20230218003323.2322580-1-ericvh@kernel.org>
 <20230218003323.2322580-12-ericvh@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230218003323.2322580-12-ericvh@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

Eric Van Hensbergen wrote on Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 12:33:23AM +0000:
> Unclear if this case ever happens, but if no inode in dentry, then
> the dentry is definitely invalid.  Seemed to be the opposite in the
> existing code.

Looking at other implementations of d_revalidate (ecryptfs, cifs, vfat)
it seems to be assumed that the inode is always valid.

I'd just remove the if, or if we keep it add a WARN or something for a
while so we can remove it in a few releases?

(That said, it's better to return 0 than 1 here, so don't take this for
a no -- progress is progress)
-- 
Dominique