Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:30:20PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> On 02/02/2012 12:18 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
>> > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> No extra "keep track of inode counts by hand" crap, and no idiotic
>> >> config options that just make it easy to (conditionally) get things
>> >> wrong. Just do it right, and do it *unconditionally* right.
>> > 
>> > And btw, "nlink shows number of subdirectories" for a directory entry
>> > really *is* right. It's how Unix filesystems work, like it or not.
>> > 
>> > It's mainly lazy/bad filesystems that set nlink to 1. So the whole
>> > "nlink==1" case is meant for crap like FAT etc, not for a filesystem
>> > that we control and that could easily just do it right.
>> > 
>> > Which is why I detest that config option. It's as if you were asking the user
>> > 
>> >  "Do you want to make the sysfs filesystem act like crap filesystems?"
>> > 
>> > and kernel config time. What kind of inane question is that?
>> 
>> <thread resumed...>
>> 
>> What's going on here? I still have to revert "sysfs: Kill nlink
>> counting." with today's -next to have working sensors.
>
> I don't remember.  I thought there was a proposed patch for this issue
> from Eric, but I don't see it in my queue anywhere.
>
> Eric, what was the resolution here?

Apologies. Cold/Allergies and distractions have kept it away.
sysfs patches in a follow up.

Eric