[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158172596.9141.91.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 11:36:36 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>
To: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org
Subject: Re: - r-o-bind-mount-clean-up-ocfs2-nlink-handling.patch removed
from -mm tree
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 11:27 -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 10:06:30PM -0700, akpm@...l.org wrote:
> > The patch titled
> >
> > r/o bind mounts: clean up OCFS2 nlink handling
> >
> > has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename is
> >
> > r-o-bind-mount-clean-up-ocfs2-nlink-handling.patch
> >
> > This patch was dropped because git-ocfs2 changes broke it. New patch, please.
> Yep, that was very likely due to my dentry vote removal changes.
>
> Dave, how's this one look? I guess I'll leave the same description message
> below...
I was _just_ fighting with your git tree to see what was conflicting!
You have impeccable timing.
> static int ocfs2_unlink(struct inode *dir,
> struct dentry *dentry)
> {
> int status;
> - unsigned int saved_nlink = 0;
> struct inode *inode = dentry->d_inode;
> struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(dir->i_sb);
> u64 blkno;
> @@ -813,6 +825,7 @@ static int ocfs2_unlink(struct inode *di
> struct buffer_head *dirent_bh = NULL;
> char orphan_name[OCFS2_ORPHAN_NAMELEN + 1];
> struct buffer_head *orphan_entry_bh = NULL;
> + unsigned int future_nlink;
>
> mlog_entry("(0x%p, 0x%p, '%.*s')\n", dir, dentry,
> dentry->d_name.len, dentry->d_name.name);
> @@ -876,15 +889,10 @@ static int ocfs2_unlink(struct inode *di
> }
> }
>
> - /* There are still a few steps left until we can consider the
> - * unlink to have succeeded. Save off nlink here before
> - * modification so we can set it back in case we hit an issue
> - * before commit. */
> - saved_nlink = inode->i_nlink;
> - if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
> - inode->i_nlink = 0;
> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode) && (inode->i_nlink == 2))
> + future_nlink = 0;
> else
> - inode->i_nlink--;
> + future_nlink = inode->i_nlink - 1;
Now that the vote call is gone, I don't think we even use future_nlink.
Can we just kill this entire section?
-- Dave
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists