lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [git pull] vfs pile 1
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 04:11:17PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > ... and sure enough, ext3 has the same piece of fun.
>
> Hmm. Do we want to have the s_remove_count games for this "temporarily
> zero nlink" case? Maybe we don't want to do drop_nlink/set_nlink? Does
> it matter?

The thing is, the total result in case of failure should be drop_nlink
with s_remove_count bumped. We could turn that into
set i_nlink to 0, without touching s_remove_count
write the body
if failed, bump s_remove_count and bugger off
otherwise set i_nlink to 1, without touching s_remove_count
but that's far more intrusive change than what I posted.

> Anyway, mind sending me a patch with changelog and sign-off?

Sure, will do. I have several more fixes in my tree right now (including
such gems as double kfree() in devpts on mount failure ;-/), so I'll send
a pull request in a couple of hours anyway. Would you be OK with having
that patch in the same pile?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-09 01:27    [W:0.032 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site