Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: [CFT] [JANITORIAL] Unbork fs.h | Date | Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:04:55 +0100 |
| |
On January 3, 2002 05:45 pm, Alexander Viro wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > In article <E16M7Gz-00015E-00@starship.berlin> you wrote: > > > - inode = get_empty_inode(); > > > + inode = get_empty_inode(sb); > > > > How about killing get_empty_inode completly and using new_inode() instead? > > There should be no regularly allocated inode without a superblock. > > Seconded. However, you'll need to zero out ->i_dev for objects that > traditionally have zero ->st_dev (pipes and sockets).
If you spell out exactly what special case treatment you'd like for i_dev, I'll make the changes to get rid of get_empty_inode.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |