On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 01:59:10 +0000
Al Viro [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 08:32:46PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
quoted
+static struct inode *instance_inode(struct dentry *parent, struct inode *inode)
+{
+ struct tracefs_inode *ti;
+ struct inode *root_inode;
+
+ root_inode = d_inode(inode->i_sb->s_root);
+
+ /* If parent is NULL then use root inode */
+ if (!parent)
+ return root_inode;
+
+ /* Find the inode that is flagged as an instance or the root inode */
+ do {
+ inode = d_inode(parent);
+ if (inode == root_inode)
+ return root_inode;
+
+ ti = get_tracefs(inode);
+
+ if (ti->flags & TRACEFS_INSTANCE_INODE)
+ return inode;
+ } while ((parent = parent->d_parent));
*blink*
This is equivalent to
...
parent = parent->d_parent;
} while (true);
Yeah, that loop went through a few iterations as I first thought that root
was a tracefs_inode and the get_tracefs() would work on it. No, it was not,
and it caused a cash. But I didn't rewrite the loop well after fixing that.
I was also not sure if parent could be NULL, and wanted to protect against it.
->d_parent is *never* NULL. And what the hell is that loop supposed to do,
anyway? Find the nearest ancestor tagged with TRACEFS_INSTANCE_INODE?
If root is not marked that way, I would suggest
if (!parent)
parent = inode->i_sb->s_root;
while (!IS_ROOT(parent)) {
struct tracefs_inode *ti = get_tracefs(parent->d_inode);
if (ti->flags & TRACEFS_INSTANCE_INODE)
break;
parent = parent->d_parent;
}
return parent->d_inode;
Sure, I could rewrite it that way too.
Thanks,
-- Steve