Hi Al,
Thank you. This feels a bit like a "time machine", i.e. being
instantly transferred to the almost forgotten distant past for the joy
of seeing familiar faces. Well, past, present or future --- Al Viro is
always right (especially as far as filesystems' code is concerned) and
I safely defer to you --- if you say it is better, then it most
certainly is, dear friend. And to me it looks better too.
Kind regards,
Tigran
On 13 May 2018 at 22:30, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> code is actually simpler that way.
>
> Cc: "Tigran A. Aivazian" <aivazian.tigran@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/bfs/dir.c | 7 +------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/bfs/dir.c b/fs/bfs/dir.c
> index ee832ca5f734..facf9614a381 100644
> --- a/fs/bfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/bfs/dir.c
> @@ -141,14 +141,9 @@ static struct dentry *bfs_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> unsigned long ino = (unsigned long)le16_to_cpu(de->ino);
> brelse(bh);
> inode = bfs_iget(dir->i_sb, ino);
> - if (IS_ERR(inode)) {
> - mutex_unlock(&info->bfs_lock);
> - return ERR_CAST(inode);
> - }
> }
> mutex_unlock(&info->bfs_lock);
> - d_add(dentry, inode);
> - return NULL;
> + return d_splice_alias(inode, dentry);
> }
>
> static int bfs_link(struct dentry *old, struct inode *dir,
> --
> 2.11.0
>
