Completely remove symlink codes and definitions.
In the previous patch, it was not completely removed.
Signed-off-by: Tetsuhiro Kohada <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h | 3 ---
drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c | 3 ---
drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c | 27 ---------------------------
3 files changed, 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h
index 4a0a481fe010..cd3479fc78ba 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h
@@ -63,7 +63,6 @@
#define TYPE_VOLUME 0x0103
#define TYPE_DIR 0x0104
#define TYPE_FILE 0x011F
-#define TYPE_SYMLINK 0x015F
#define TYPE_CRITICAL_SEC 0x0200
#define TYPE_STREAM 0x0201
#define TYPE_EXTEND 0x0202
@@ -198,13 +197,11 @@ static inline u16 get_row_index(u16 i)
#define ATTR_VOLUME 0x0008
#define ATTR_SUBDIR 0x0010
#define ATTR_ARCHIVE 0x0020
-#define ATTR_SYMLINK 0x0040
#define ATTR_EXTEND 0x000F
#define ATTR_RWMASK 0x007E
/* file creation modes */
#define FM_REGULAR 0x00
-#define FM_SYMLINK 0x40
#define NUM_UPCASE 2918
diff --git a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c
index d30dc050411e..941094b08dd9 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c
@@ -844,9 +844,6 @@ static void exfat_set_entry_type(struct dentry_t *p_entry, u32 type)
} else if (type == TYPE_FILE) {
ep->type = 0x85;
SET16_A(ep->attr, ATTR_ARCHIVE);
- } else if (type == TYPE_SYMLINK) {
- ep->type = 0x85;
- SET16_A(ep->attr, ATTR_ARCHIVE | ATTR_SYMLINK);
}
}
diff --git a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c
index c7bc07e91c45..6f3b72eb999d 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c
@@ -320,8 +320,6 @@ static inline mode_t exfat_make_mode(struct exfat_sb_info *sbi, u32 attr,
if (attr & ATTR_SUBDIR)
return (mode & ~sbi->options.fs_dmask) | S_IFDIR;
- else if (attr & ATTR_SYMLINK)
- return (mode & ~sbi->options.fs_dmask) | S_IFLNK;
else
return (mode & ~sbi->options.fs_fmask) | S_IFREG;
}
@@ -2399,24 +2397,6 @@ static const struct inode_operations exfat_dir_inode_operations = {
/*======================================================================*/
/* File Operations */
/*======================================================================*/
-static const char *exfat_get_link(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode,
- struct delayed_call *done)
-{
- struct exfat_inode_info *ei = EXFAT_I(inode);
-
- if (ei->target) {
- char *cookie = ei->target;
-
- if (cookie)
- return (char *)(ei->target);
- }
- return NULL;
-}
-
-static const struct inode_operations exfat_symlink_inode_operations = {
- .get_link = exfat_get_link,
-};
-
static int exfat_file_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
{
struct super_block *sb = inode->i_sb;
@@ -2688,13 +2668,6 @@ static int exfat_fill_inode(struct inode *inode, struct file_id_t *fid)
i_size_write(inode, info.Size);
EXFAT_I(inode)->mmu_private = i_size_read(inode);
set_nlink(inode, info.num_subdirs);
- } else if (info.attr & ATTR_SYMLINK) { /* symbolic link */
- inode->i_generation |= 1;
- inode->i_mode = exfat_make_mode(sbi, info.attr, 0777);
- inode->i_op = &exfat_symlink_inode_operations;
-
- i_size_write(inode, info.Size);
- EXFAT_I(inode)->mmu_private = i_size_read(inode);
} else { /* regular file */
inode->i_generation |= 1;
inode->i_mode = exfat_make_mode(sbi, info.attr, 0777);
--
2.25.1
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:37:46 +0900, Tetsuhiro Kohada said:
> Completely remove symlink codes and definitions.
> In the previous patch, it was not completely removed.
Then this should have been [PATCH v2], and the fixed version [PATCH v3]
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuhiro Kohada <[email protected]
>
> ---
And right in here there should be something like this:
v3: fixed subject line
v2: previous patch didn't completely remove it
> drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h | 3 ---
> drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_core.c | 3 ---
> drivers/staging/exfat/exfat_super.c | 27 ---------------------------
> 3 files changed, 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h b/drivers/staging/exfat/exfat.h
> index 4a0a481fe010..cd3479fc78ba 100644
Thanks for comment.
> Then this should have been [PATCH v2], and the fixed version [PATCH
> v3]
2nd patch(Additional patch) not include 1st patch(RFC PATCH).
And the 1st patch has been merged into 'staging-next'.
Now I can't decide.
a) Add only version information to the 2nd patch.
b) Merge the 1st and 2nd patches.
Which is better for v3?
--
Kohada Tetsuhiro <[email protected]>
On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 02:14:02 +0000, "[email protected]" said:
> Thanks for comment.
>
> > Then this should have been [PATCH v2], and the fixed version [PATCH
> > v3]
>
> 2nd patch(Additional patch) not include 1st patch(RFC PATCH).
> And the 1st patch has been merged into 'staging-next'.
> Now I can't decide.
> a) Add only version information to the 2nd patch.
> b) Merge the 1st and 2nd patches.
>
> Which is better for v3?
The first part is in-tree, so we don't re-visit it in this case. You want a
new patch that consists of *only* the second set of changes, and the changelog
for the changes for that patch.