Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 May 2002 16:00:54 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] iget_locked [3/6] |
| |
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Jan Harkes wrote:
> @@ -156,11 +165,12 @@ > { > int error = -ENOMEM; > > - *inode = iget(sb, CTL_INO); > - if ( *inode ) { > + *inode = iget_locked(sb, CTL_INO); > + if ( *inode && ((*inode)->i_state & I_NEW) ) { > (*inode)->i_op = &coda_ioctl_inode_operations; > (*inode)->i_fop = &coda_ioctl_operations; > (*inode)->i_mode = 0444; > + unlock_new_inode(*inode); > error = 0;
Ehhh.... Do we need this guy hashed, in the first place?
> destroy_inode: reiserfs_destroy_inode, > read_inode: reiserfs_read_inode, > - read_inode2: reiserfs_read_inode2,
Why do we keep ->read_inode() here?
- 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/
| |