On 2/26/25 1:18 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> nfsd_create_locked() doesn't need to explicitly call fh_update().
> On success (which is the only time that fh_update() matters at all),
> nfsd_create_setattr() will be called and it will call fh_update().
>
> This extra call is not harmful, but is not necessary.
> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/vfs.c | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> index 29cb7b812d71..1035010f1198 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> @@ -1505,11 +1505,8 @@ nfsd_create_locked(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp,
> }
> dput(resfhp->fh_dentry);
> resfhp->fh_dentry = dget(d);
> - err = fh_update(resfhp);
> dput(dchild);
> dchild = d;
> - if (err)
> - goto out;
> }
> break;
> case S_IFCHR:
Thanks for splitting this out!
I was hoping to see a reference to commit 3819bb0d79f5 ("nfsd:
vfs_mkdir() might succeed leaving dentry negative unhashed") in the
patch description... but reviewers can figure that out themselves.
Acked-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Chuck Lever
