MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20140717072241.2c1549a3@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
References: <20140714151405.2fa06dd7@notabene.brown>
	<20140714081455.69f55224@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
	<20140714223513.47807c98@notabene.brown>
	<20140714090028.6f04fd2c@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
	<20140715085727.6fa12272@notabene.brown>
	<20140714194738.5aafaf25@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
	<20140717115024.1eb7433d@notabene.brown>
	<20140717072241.2c1549a3@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:52:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegs+EzqtDTZEWTHP0b7HNM+4sFPN4KwsdEhEh6gabmdjWA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: nfs4_lookup_revalidate need to report STALE inodes.
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
To: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        NFS <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Jeff Layton
<jeff.layton@primarydata.com> wrote:

> What's so special about an EOPENSTALE return from finish_open that we
> need to handle retries in do_last? It seems like we could get rid of the
> stale_open label and just let do_filp_open handle it like we would
> an ESTALE return from any other spot in the function.
>
> Just for giggles, here's an RFC patch. It builds but I haven't tested
> it. It might also be possible to do some cleanup around saved_parent
> with this.
>
> Thoughts?

EOPENSTALE is an optimization for the redoing only the last component.
It's the analogue of ->d_revalidate() failure, in which case lookup of
that component only is retried path components before that are not.

I'm not sure if it's a valid optimization, but if not, then we should
also consider doing LOOKUP_REVAL on the whole path on any
d_revalidate() failure as well.

Thanks,
Miklos