Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Feb 2014 21:59:08 +0000 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] ceph: fix posix ACL hooks |
| |
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 01:03:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> - err = vfs_mkdir(path.dentry->d_inode, dentry, mode); > + err = vfs_mkdir(path.dentry, dentry, mode);
Pointless - path.dentry == dentry->d_parent anyway.
> - err = vfs_mknod(path.dentry->d_inode, dentry, mode, dev->devt); > + err = vfs_mknod(path.dentry, dentry, mode, dev->devt);
Ditto.
> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ static int dev_rmdir(const char *name) > return PTR_ERR(dentry); > if (dentry->d_inode) { > if (dentry->d_inode->i_private == &thread) > - err = vfs_rmdir(parent.dentry->d_inode, dentry); > + err = vfs_rmdir(parent.dentry, dentry);
Ditto, with s/path/parent/ > @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int handle_remove(const char *nodename, struct device *dev) > mutex_lock(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex); > notify_change(dentry, &newattrs, NULL); > mutex_unlock(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex); > - err = vfs_unlink(parent.dentry->d_inode, dentry, NULL); > + err = vfs_unlink(parent.dentry, dentry, NULL); > if (!err || err == -ENOENT) > deleted = 1; > }
And here as well.
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lvfs/lvfs_linux.c > @@ -222,8 +222,8 @@ int lustre_rename(struct dentry *dir, struct vfsmount *mnt, > if (IS_ERR(dchild_new)) > GOTO(put_old, err = PTR_ERR(dchild_new)); > > - err = ll_vfs_rename(dir->d_inode, dchild_old, mnt, > - dir->d_inode, dchild_new, mnt, NULL); > + err = ll_vfs_rename(dir, dchild_old, mnt, > + dir, dchild_new, mnt, NULL);
... and again, that's completely pointless.
> -int afs_permission(struct inode *inode, int mask) > +int afs_permission(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode, int mask)
Oh, _lovely_. So not only do we pass dentry, the arguments are redundant as well.
> -static inline int btrfs_may_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child) > +static inline int btrfs_may_create(struct dentry *parent, struct dentry *child)
I'm fairly sure that it's also pointless, because parent is going to be, well, the parent. Of child.
> +static int gfs2_vfs_permission(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode, int mask) > +{ > + return gfs2_permission(inode, mask); > +}
Er... You do realize that callers of gfs2_permission() tend to have the dentry in question, either directly or as ->d_parent of something they have?
I really hate the whole thing... ;-/
| |