On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 12:28 +0000, Al Viro wrote:

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 03:21:51PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote:

quoted

The patch tries to fix following complaint(next-1112) caused by unpaired
rcu_read_lock/unlock in function prepend_path():

Frankly, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to shift rcu_read_unlock()
past the second done_seqretry() in there...

Do you mean we have rcu_read_lock/unlock outside of the goto loops? 

It seems to me it would cause the two locks(mount,rename) potentially
acquired inside rcu read lock. Or did I misunderstand something here?

Thanks,
Zhong