On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> > > Expand noreplace_rename2() because next patch will implement one more flag.
noreplace_rename2()?? I understand the code better than this comment. > > Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> > Cc: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]> Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]> though I wouldn't object to a comment, perhaps just in the commit message, like you have in ext4: Existence checking was done by the VFS, otherwise "RENAME_NOREPLACE" is equivalent to regular rename. > --- > mm/shmem.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c > index 1140f49b6ded..791b05514f9a 100644 > --- a/mm/shmem.c > +++ b/mm/shmem.c > @@ -2022,11 +2022,14 @@ static int shmem_rmdir(struct inode *dir, struct > dentry *dentry) > * it exists so that the VFS layer correctly free's it when it > * gets overwritten. > */ > -static int shmem_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > struct inode *new_dir, struct dentry *new_dentry) > +static int shmem_rename2(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > struct inode *new_dir, struct dentry *new_dentry, unsigned int flags) > { > struct inode *inode = old_dentry->d_inode; > int they_are_dirs = S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode); > > + if (flags & ~(RENAME_NOREPLACE)) > + return -EINVAL; > + > if (!simple_empty(new_dentry)) > return -ENOTEMPTY; > > @@ -2709,7 +2712,7 @@ static const struct inode_operations > shmem_dir_inode_operations = { > .mkdir = shmem_mkdir, > .rmdir = shmem_rmdir, > .mknod = shmem_mknod, > - .rename = shmem_rename, > + .rename2 = shmem_rename2, > .tmpfile = shmem_tmpfile, > #endif > #ifdef CONFIG_TMPFS_XATTR > -- > 1.8.1.4 -- 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/
