Excerpts from Al Viro's message of 2011-03-04 12:13:53 -0500: > a) rename() plays with i_nlink of old_inode; bad, since it's not > locked. I'd add a variant of btrfs_unlink_inode() that would leave > btrfs_drop_nlink()/btrfs_update_inode() to callers and use it instead. > b) btrfs_link() doesn't check for i_nlink overflows. I don't > know if there's anything preventing that many links to a file on btrfs, > but if there is, it's at least worth a comment in there... > > Please, review; patches in followups or in #btrfs in vfs-2.6.git
Thanks, these both look good but I'll test here as well. Are you planning on pushing for .38? -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
