Re: [PATCH] nfs_unlink() race (was: nfs_refresh_inode: inode number

[Trond Myklebust]

>>>>> " " == Linus Torvalds <[e-mail]> writes:

     > I think your #1 is "obviously correct", but the fact that it
     > breaks rmdir sounds like a bummer. However, since it only
     > breaks rmdir when silly-renames exist - and since silly-renames
     > should only happen when you have a file descriptor still open -
     > I'd be inclined to say that this is the right behaviour.

I agree.

If people prefer 'rm -rf' correctness instead of unlinked-but-open,
then we could do that by changing the behaviour of 'unlink' on a
silly-deleted filed. Currently it returns EBUSY, but we could just as
well have it complete the unlink, and mark the inode as being stale...

Cheers,
   Trond