lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] f2fs: fix comment of f2fs_evict_inode
From
Date
Hi Jaegeuk,

On 2019/9/28 2:31, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> Hi Chao,
>
> On 09/25, Chao Yu wrote:
>> evict() should be called once i_count is zero, rather than i_nlinke
>> is zero.
>>
>> Reported-by: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/f2fs/inode.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> index db4fec30c30d..8262f4a483d3 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
>> @@ -632,7 +632,7 @@ int f2fs_write_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> - * Called at the last iput() if i_nlink is zero
>
> I don't think this comment is wrong. You may be able to add on top of this.

It actually misleads the developer or user.

How do you think of:

"Called at the last iput() if i_count is zero, and will release all meta/data
blocks allocated in the inode if i_nlink is zero"

Thanks,

>
>> + * Called at the last iput() if i_count is zero
>> */
>> void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
>> {
>> --
>> 2.18.0.rc1
> .
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-29 02:53    [W:0.127 / U:2.912 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site