From f17b6042073e7000a90063f7edbca59a5bd1caa2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:43:30 +0530 Subject: fs: Remove i_nlink check from file system link callback Now that VFS check for inode->i_nlink == 0 and returns proper error, remove similar check from file system Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- fs/ubifs/dir.c | 18 ------------------ 1 file changed, 18 deletions(-) (limited to 'fs/ubifs/dir.c') diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c index 14f64b689d7f..7217d67a80a6 100644 --- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c +++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c @@ -522,24 +522,6 @@ static int ubifs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir, ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&dir->i_mutex)); ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&inode->i_mutex)); - /* - * Return -ENOENT if we've raced with unlink and i_nlink is 0. Doing - * otherwise has the potential to corrupt the orphan inode list. - * - * Indeed, consider a scenario when 'vfs_link(dirA/fileA)' and - * 'vfs_unlink(dirA/fileA, dirB/fileB)' race. 'vfs_link()' does not - * lock 'dirA->i_mutex', so this is possible. Both of the functions - * lock 'fileA->i_mutex' though. Suppose 'vfs_unlink()' wins, and takes - * 'fileA->i_mutex' mutex first. Suppose 'fileA->i_nlink' is 1. In this - * case 'ubifs_unlink()' will drop the last reference, and put 'inodeA' - * to the list of orphans. After this, 'vfs_link()' will link - * 'dirB/fileB' to 'inodeA'. This is a problem because, for example, - * the subsequent 'vfs_unlink(dirB/fileB)' will add the same inode - * to the list of orphans. - */ - if (inode->i_nlink == 0) - return -ENOENT; - err = dbg_check_synced_i_size(inode); if (err) return err; -- cgit v1.2.3-59-g8ed1b