On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 03:43:46PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 12:34:48PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > > I guess we need to make sure we call ext4_forget with correct > > is_metadata values. I did the below patch. The xattr changes in the > > patch should be split as a separate one. I am not sure why we do a > > get_bh there. > > It doesn't hurt to call ext4_forget() with the correct values, but I > figured it was easier just to make ext4_forget() DTRT thing by > checking the inode type since it has access to i_mode. My patch > didn't take into account symlinks, though. Good catch on your part. May be you want to merge the ext4_remove_blocks changes also. That make sure anybody reading code doesn't have to spent time in figuring out why ext4_forget is called with metadata = 0 and ext4_free_blocks is called with metadata = 1. -aneesh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
