Re: [PATCH 04/28] OCFS2 is screwy

[Mark Fasheh]

Hi Dave,

On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 08:21:46PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Please ignore that last one.  It didn't correctly handle directories'
> with a remaining i_nlink of 2.
Thanks for following up with this patch - it looks pretty good. One comment
below.


> @@ -888,7 +890,9 @@
>  	/* We can set nlink on the dinode now. clear the saved version
>  	 * so that it doesn't get set later. */
>  	fe->i_links_count = cpu_to_le16(inode->i_nlink);
> -	saved_nlink = 0;
> +	inode_drop_nlink(inode);
> +	if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
> +		inode_drop_nlink(inode);
The set of 'i_links_count' on 'fe' should be below the inode_drop_nlink()
calls - otherwise we'll be setting the old nlink value on the disk inode :)

While you're there you can just remove that comment - it's no longer
accurate :)

Thanks again,
	--Mark

--
Mark Fasheh
Senior Software Developer, Oracle
mark.fasheh@xxxxxxxxxx
-
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/