I am sorry, the last patch "fix the outdated comment in
ext2_nfs_get_inode()" has some " whitespace errors detected". So
correct it and remake it.
I will be more careful later.
Signed-off-by: Li Haifeng <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext2/super.c | 7 +++----
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext2/super.c b/fs/ext2/super.c
index 1dd62ed..bda10cf 100644
--- a/fs/ext2/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext2/super.c
@@ -327,10 +327,9 @@ static struct inode *ext2_nfs_get_inode(struct
super_block *sb,
if (ino > le32_to_cpu(EXT2_SB(sb)->s_es->s_inodes_count))
return ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
- /* iget isn't really right if the inode is currently unallocated!!
- * ext2_read_inode currently does appropriate checks, but
- * it might be "neater" to call ext2_get_inode first and check
- * if the inode is valid.....
+ /*
+ * ext2_iget isn't really right if the inode is currently unallocated!!
+ * And it also does appropriate checks to handle the stale inode.
*/
inode = ext2_iget(sb, ino);
if (IS_ERR(inode))
--
1.7.4.1
On Tue 30-08-11 20:11:28, Li Haifeng wrote:
> I am sorry, the last patch "fix the outdated comment in
> ext2_nfs_get_inode()" has some " whitespace errors detected". So
> correct it and remake it.
>
> I will be more careful later.
Hmm, your patch still has mangled whitespaces and wrapped long lines.
Please make sure your mailer doesn't do it or use git send-email to send
patches. Also the subject line misses "ext2:" in the beginning (after
[PATCH]). Finally, I've further changed the text in the comment because
"And" does not really make sense in that context to me. The patch I now
carry in my tree is below.
Honza
>From 8e871fa6a2db8ec615614e547d95de21f9045a52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Li Haifeng <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:32:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ext2: fix the outdated comment in ext2_nfs_get_inode()
Signed-off-by: Li Haifeng <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
---
fs/ext2/super.c | 8 ++++----
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext2/super.c b/fs/ext2/super.c
index 174782f..adf3cde 100644
--- a/fs/ext2/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext2/super.c
@@ -327,10 +327,10 @@ static struct inode *ext2_nfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb,
if (ino > le32_to_cpu(EXT2_SB(sb)->s_es->s_inodes_count))
return ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
- /* iget isn't really right if the inode is currently unallocated!!
- * ext2_read_inode currently does appropriate checks, but
- * it might be "neater" to call ext2_get_inode first and check
- * if the inode is valid.....
+ /*
+ * ext2_iget isn't quite right if the inode is currently unallocated!
+ * However ext2_iget currently does appropriate checks to handle stale
+ * inodes so everything is OK.
*/
inode = ext2_iget(sb, ino);
if (IS_ERR(inode))
--
1.7.1
Thanks, Jan.
2011/8/30 Jan Kara <[email protected]>:
> On Tue 30-08-11 20:11:28, Li Haifeng wrote:
>> I am sorry, the last patch "fix the outdated comment in
>> ext2_nfs_get_inode()" has some " whitespace errors detected". So
>> correct it and remake it.
>>
>> I will be more careful later.
> ?Hmm, your patch still has mangled whitespaces and wrapped long lines.
> Please make sure your mailer doesn't do it or use git send-email to send
> patches. Also the subject line misses "ext2:" in the beginning (after
> [PATCH]). Finally, I've further changed the text in the comment because
> "And" does not really make sense in that context to me. The patch I now
> carry in my tree is below.
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Honza
>
> From 8e871fa6a2db8ec615614e547d95de21f9045a52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Li Haifeng <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:32:50 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] ext2: fix the outdated comment in ext2_nfs_get_inode()
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Haifeng <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> ---
> ?fs/ext2/super.c | ? ?8 ++++----
> ?1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext2/super.c b/fs/ext2/super.c
> index 174782f..adf3cde 100644
> --- a/fs/ext2/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext2/super.c
> @@ -327,10 +327,10 @@ static struct inode *ext2_nfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb,
> ? ? ? ?if (ino > le32_to_cpu(EXT2_SB(sb)->s_es->s_inodes_count))
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?return ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
>
> - ? ? ? /* iget isn't really right if the inode is currently unallocated!!
> - ? ? ? ?* ext2_read_inode currently does appropriate checks, but
> - ? ? ? ?* it might be "neater" to call ext2_get_inode first and check
> - ? ? ? ?* if the inode is valid.....
> + ? ? ? /*
> + ? ? ? ?* ext2_iget isn't quite right if the inode is currently unallocated!
> + ? ? ? ?* However ext2_iget currently does appropriate checks to handle stale
> + ? ? ? ?* inodes so everything is OK.
> ? ? ? ? */
> ? ? ? ?inode = ext2_iget(sb, ino);
> ? ? ? ?if (IS_ERR(inode))
> --
> 1.7.1
>
--
Li Haifeng
Laboratory of Service Computing Technology and System
Home page:http://tek-life.org