On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:16:51PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 10/19/2010 05:42 AM, npiggin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Protect inode->i_count with i_lock, rather than having it atomic. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > <> > > fs/exofs/inode.c | 12 +++++++--- > > fs/exofs/namei.c | 4 ++- > <> > > Index: linux-2.6/fs/exofs/inode.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/exofs/inode.c 2010-10-19 14:17:26.000000000 +1100 > > +++ linux-2.6/fs/exofs/inode.c 2010-10-19 14:19:18.000000000 +1100 > > @@ -1107,7 +1107,9 @@ > > > > Hi Nick, Please use -p option in your diff(s) it is a bit hard to follow > and review without the proper function context. These patches are on a git > tree. Why don't you use git to produce and send these patches? Yes, sorry that was a big mistake. New computer, I don't know why it doesn't do that as default option. Thanks, Nick -- 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
