On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 18:42 +0800, Rui Xiang wrote: > On 2013/12/6 21:46, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > > On Dec 6, 2013, at 4:30, Rui Xiang <rui.xiang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> In common function nfs_instantiate to create, mkdir, and mknod, > >> if dentry->d_inode exits, it should return -EEXIST instead of > >> -EACCES. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Rui Xiang <rui.xiang@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> fs/nfs/dir.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c > >> index 2518865..e570b37 100644 > >> --- a/fs/nfs/dir.c > >> +++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c > >> @@ -1547,7 +1547,7 @@ int nfs_instantiate(struct dentry *dentry, struct nfs_fh *fhandle, > >> struct dentry *parent = dget_parent(dentry); > >> struct inode *dir = parent->d_inode; > >> struct inode *inode; > >> - int error = -EACCES; > >> + int error = -EEXIST; > >> > >> d_drop(dentry); > >> > > > > That looks like it should rather be a WARN_ON(). If the caller has set the dentry's inode before creating the file, then something is really wrong. > It can return -EEXIST to say that the file already exits, then will exit. But why does it need a WARN_ON(). Please give me some advise. > If we ever hit that condition then it means that the caller is doing something very wrong. That's what the WARN_ON (or WARN_ON_ONCE) would be there to check. Cheers Trond -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
