Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:25:27 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: inode_lock "decorative"? |
| |
On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> What I ask you is _why_ you increment and the iput by hand. Just remove > the i_count++ and the iput() and all should remains fine. Basically you > run always with an i_count of 2 while you could run all the time with an > i_count of 1 without differences (unless I am missing something... hmm).
Correct fix is to get rid of this sock->inode thing completely. Check what fields of ->inode are used - you'll see that we can easily get rid of that mess. Will make things much cleaner. I can roll such patch tomorrow (after the new cache/symlink stuff will be done).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |