On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 12:13:58PM -0500, Dave Quigley wrote: > So are we keeping the dentry parameter for these calls, or am I changing > them over to an inode. If it is going to use an inode this means I need > to change the parameters for the xattr code. Is there a reason why the > xattr code takes dentries instead of an inode? Ah, that's the reason why you use dentries. Either keep the dentry in the call that does the xattr modification for now and document that why you're doing it, or if you feel eager fix up the xattr interface. In fact the new fine-grained xattr interface already only passed inodes which is what the inode operations should have been doing aswell - xattrs are a concept tied to the inode and not in any way to a hiearchical pathname component. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
