Re: [PATCH v2] ext[234]: Return -EIO not -ESTALE on directorytraversal through deleted inode

[Theodore Tso]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:53:39PM -0500, Bryan Donlan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > +               if (unlikely(IS_ERR(inode))) {
> > +                       if (PTR_ERR(inode) == -ESTALE) {
> > +                               ext3_error(dir->i_sb, "ext2_lookup",
> > +                                               "deleted inode referenced: %lu",
> > +                                               ino);
> > +                               return ERR_PTR(-EIO);
> > +                       } else {
> > +                               return ERR_CAST(inode);
> > +                       }
> > +               }
> 
> I just noticed that I forgot to edit the function name in the
> ext3_error and ext4_error invocations... Would it be better to send a
> delta to fix this or resubmit the whole thing?

It's already been pulled into akpm's tree as separate patches.  I'll
fix up the ext4 one by hand; probably better for you to send
replacement patches for ext3 separately to akpm and ask him to replace.

I'd suggest using __FUNC__ instead of hard-coding the function name, BTW...

    	    	  	   	      		  - Ted

--
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/