On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 06-21 05:22, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 02:39:10PM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
>> > -static inline struct dentry *d_backing_dentry(struct dentry *upper)
>> > +static inline struct inode *d_backing_inode(const struct dentry *dentry)
>> > {
>> > - return upper;
>> > + return d_inode(dentry);
>> > }
>>
>> Why even keep both functions around then?
>>
>
> Yes, I would love to get rid of them. There are just too many users.
> 1332 users of d_inode
> 176 users of d_backing_inode
>
If you had an idea to get rid of d_inode() please resist the temptation.
s/d_backing_inode/d_inode is no harm.
> Similarly, file_inode() with 1020 users is another candidate.
>
Similarly, please resist the temptation to remove this harmless
wrapper, especially, not before this discussion ends with
an understanding about the required VFS abstractions:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=152904165622462&w=2
Thanks,
Amir.
