Hi Richard, On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:45:08AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Hyunchul, > > Am 22.05.2017 um 06:30 schrieb Hyunchul Lee: > >> + if (move) > >> + old_inode_ui->parent_inum = new_dir->i_ino; > >> + > >> err = ubifs_jnl_rename(c, old_dir, old_inode, &old_nm, new_dir, > >> new_inode, &new_nm, whiteout, sync); > > > > I think that old_inode_ui->parent_inum could point old_dir, even though > > old_inode > > is a child of new_dir. this could happen that there is power-cut before > > old_inode is synced. so I guess that old_inode is needed to be written with > > rename's node group in ubifs_jnl_rename. is it right? > > I assumed that the journal does this already because we change > old_inode->i_ctime > in this function too. > But checking the code showed the opposite. > So, if we face a power-cut the rename can succeed but we lose the ctime > change. > > This needs to be addressed before we can add the parent pointer.
Is writing old_inode->i_ctime required? I guess that it is needed only when IS_SYNC(old_inode) is true, otherwise we don't need to guarantee that ctime is synced. > > Thanks, > //richard > > ______________________________________________________ > Linux MTD discussion mailing list > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/ -- Thanks, Hyunchul
