Re: FTS not ready for a remount during traversal

[Jim Meyering]

Kamil Dudka wrote:
...
>> I saw similar numbers when timing rm -rf and chmod -R.
>> Thus, I'm reluctant to impose such a penalty without
>> first exhausting all other possibilities.
>
> Yes, it makes sense. However what other possibilities do we have actually?

Change the kernel, or find a way to make fts do what we
want without the added cost.

> Preferring higher performance in some rear cases over correct behavior
> in more common cases is of course not a possibility for me.

If you are implying that I might make such a trade-off,
you have not been paying attention ;-)

BTW, in my experience, this is *not* a common case at all.

In fact, the patch we're considering impacts each and every
directory access in *all* hierarchy traversals, when only a very
small number of them actually need the work-around.