Re: [PATCH] sysfs: Optionally count subdirectories to support buggyapplications

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Mon Mar 05 2012 - 11:09:55 EST


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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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?

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/