In message <1256152779-10054-18-git-send-email-vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx>, Valerie Aurora writes:
> From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxx>
>
> Add a path_whiteout() helper for vfs_whiteout().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/namei.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> include/linux/fs.h | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
> index 9a62c75..408380d 100644
> --- a/fs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/namei.c
> @@ -2231,7 +2231,7 @@ static inline int may_whiteout(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *victim,
> * After this returns with success, don't make any assumptions about the inode.
> * Just dput() it dentry.
> */
> -int vfs_whiteout(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int isdir)
> +static int vfs_whiteout(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int isdir)
Didn't some other patch introduce vfs_whiteout? So why have a second patch
which makes vfs_whiteout a static? Why not introduce both vfs_whiteout and
path_whiteout in one patch?
> {
> int err;
> struct inode *old_inode = dentry->d_inode;
> @@ -2283,6 +2283,19 @@ int vfs_whiteout(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, int isdir)
> return err;
> }
>
> +int path_whiteout(struct path *dir_path, struct dentry *dentry, int isdir)
Please document the behavior of path_whiteout in a proper comment above ii
(kernel-doc). Describe return values, side effects, etc.
Also, isdir in both vfs_whiteout and path_whiteout can be boolean.
Erez.
--
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
