On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 18:12 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:57:33AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > OCFS2 does some operations on i_nlink, then reverts them if some
> > of its operations fail to complete. This does not fit in well
> > with the drop_nlink() logic where we expect i_nlink to stay at
> > zero once it gets there.
> >
> > So, delay all of the nlink operations until we're sure that the
> > operations have completed. Also, introduce a small helper to
> > check whether an inode has proper "unlinkable" i_nlink counts
> > no matter whether it is a directory or regular inode.
> >
> > This patch is broken out from the others because it does contain
> > some logical changes.
>
> looks good to me, although I probably can't ACK ocfs2 patches.
That's probably OK. One of the Oracle guys was nice enough to help me
beat it into shape and sign off on it.
> did you look whether gfs2 in -mm needs something similar?
It doesn't appear to. It doesn't manipulate i_nlink in the same, direct
manner.
-- Dave
-
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]
