On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:09:09 +0900 (JST) Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 11:03:47 +0100, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Eeek... I'd rather not play these games with directories and devices nodes > > as well. Rationale for the original patch simply doesn't apply for those. > > > > IOW, I think it would be much saner if we did the following: make ..._test() > > refuse to merge inodes with ->i_ino == 1, take inode setup back to > > get_cramfs_inode() and make ->drop_inode() evict ones with ->i_ino == 1 > > immediately. Comments? > > > > Patch below is completely untested; it builds, but that's it. > > Thanks, your patch works well for me. But it looks a bit large for > stable tree (100 line rule). > > With current code, I think no problem on empty directories and device > nodes. So how about fixing only FIFO case first (and send it to > stable tree) and then go to your patch? > Nothing seems to have happened. Al, do you think your (now tested) patch is good for 2.6.27 and 2.6.26.x? And, it seems, 2.6.25.x. (All the way down to 2.6.14.x!) -- 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
