On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 04:52:42PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> When a filesystem decrements i_nlink to zero, it means that a
> write must be performed in order to drop the inode from the
> filesystem.
>
> We're shortly going to have keep filesystems from being remounted
> r/o between the time that this i_nlink decrement and that write
> occurs.
>
> So, add a little helper function to do the decrements. We'll
> tie into it in a bit to note when i_nlink hits zero.
Looks good. I wonder if we could find a better name for it. Maybe just
dec_nlink? And add a simple counterpart
static inline void inc_nlink(struct inode *inode)
{
inode->i_nlink++;
}
for symmetry reasons. After that the patch can go off to Andrew before
the series aswell.
> Should
> we also be checking all of the places where i_nlink is explicitly
> set to 0 in the unlink paths?
They'll definitly need some auditing.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
