Re: [GIT PULL] UDF tree fixes

From: Jan Kara
Date: Mon Dec 01 2008 - 12:06:45 EST

On Mon 01-12-08 08:33:36, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Jan Kara wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I would like to do it as well. But as I write in the changelog,
> > currently there's no good callback for that (I've mailed about it at
> > linux-fsdevel and noone had a better idea either). So for now I've just
> > used this kludge to silence the Oops.
> No, I meant just a simple "just call clear_inode() from
> udf_clear_inode()". But on a slightly closer look I notice that won't
> work, since it will just cause recursion (well, you could just clear the
> s_op field to avoid it, but that would be uglier than your fix).
> I wonder if we should perhaps just move the invalidate_inode_buffers()
> call later in clear_inode(). That's a scary change, though.
> I just think your patch is pretty ugly. I'm sure it works, but I also
> suspect it indicates some kind of more fundamental problem. I also wonder
> why udf needs it but nobody else does (others do preallocation too)
UDF needs this because it does preallocation on directories (and I don't
know about other in-kernel fs which would do this). For regular files,
preallocation is dropped on the last close() but for directories I don't
know about such a good place so we do it in udf_clear_inode().
There used to be put_inode() callback which could be used for this but
Christoph Hellwig killed it in April.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at