On 5 Mar 01 at 18:08, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Urban Widmark wrote:
>
> >
> > Is it valid to call d_add on a negative dentry?
> > (or on a dentry that is already linked in d_hash, but all negative
> > dentries are, right?)
>
> Not all of them. It _is_ legal to do d_add() on a negative dentry.
> Doing that for hashed dentries is a bug. Use d_instantiate() instead.
> Cheers,
> Al
>
> PS: as for the patch, better make it
> d_instantiate(...);
> if (!hashed)
> d_rehash(...);
It could explain why I'm getting once a month CPU spinning in d_lookup()
because of some circular list is no more one circle...
Many thanks, I'll apply it to ncpfs ASAP.
Best regards,
Petr Vandrovec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
