Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759359AbZAPHmx (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:42:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754684AbZAPHmm (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:42:42 -0500 Received: from vsmtp04.dti.ne.jp ([202.216.231.139]:40728 "EHLO vsmtp04.dti.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754044AbZAPHml (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:42:41 -0500 From: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp Subject: Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com, ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net In-Reply-To: <20090115150332.f72ad0f8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <7471.1231827621@jrobl> <20090115150332.f72ad0f8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:42:31 +0900 Message-ID: <9845.1232091751@jrobl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 613 Lines: 19 Andrew Morton: > > + atomic_inc_return(&lower_dentry->d_inode->i_count); > > + atomic_inc_return(&lower_inode->i_count); > > atomic_inc() would suffice here, yes? I thought that ..._return() is smp safe and necessary here. Because lower_inode may be touched by lower fs (outside of ecryptfs). Anyway my original patch seemed to be already dropped. J. R. Okajima -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/