On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:21:02PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
>> > The difference from your variant is that you use the stack to hold
>> > pointers to ancestors of the current victim.  You get to the parent
>> > of said victim by discarding a stack frame.  No need, since the
>> > victim contained an explicit pointer to its parent...
>>
>> Except I thought NULL was passed?
>
> AFAICS, your variant removes _everything_ in the parent.  IOW, instead
> of
>         rm -rf $ROOT/$RELATIVE_PATH
> you do
>         test -n $ROOT && rm -rf $ROOT/*
>         rm $ROOT/$RELATIVE_PATH
> which is not the same thing...

Crap, yes, I see now thanks. I can't see how we can safely traverse
the tree to find the respective struct proc_dir_entry for the passed
name as a modular solution. That is, in order to rm -rf
$ROOT/$RELATIVE_PATH I first need the $ROOT/$RELATIVE_PATH struct
proc_dir_entry.

Any recommendations?

  Luis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to