On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:42:31 +0900 hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Andrew Morton: > > > + atomic_inc_return(&lower_dentry->d_inode->i_count); > > > + atomic_inc_return(&lower_inode->i_count); > > > > atomic_inc() would suffice here, yes? > > I thought that ..._return() is smp safe and necessary here. > Because lower_inode may be touched by lower fs (outside of ecryptfs). atomic_inc() is fully atomic too. atomic_inc_return() is "special", in that it does an atomic_inc(), but also returns the result of that increment to the caller. -- 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
