Re: [RESEND/PATCH] ext[234]: Return -EIO not -ESTALE on directorytraversal missing inode

From: Theodore Tso
Date: Sun Feb 15 2009 - 00:40:17 EST


On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 11:53:48PM -0500, Bryan Donlan wrote:
> > I'm dubious about unlikely() here; OTOH, penalizing the error case
> > seems reasonable.
>
> I can leave it without the unlikely(), as it was before, but as far as
> I can tell, this should never happen under a non-corrupted, non-broken
> hardware filesystem, so it seems like a reasonable annotation to me.

You're right. I was looking at the wrong place in the source, and
thought this could happen if the lookup failed; but yes, you're right,
this case can only happen if the filesystem is corrupted or there is
an I/O error.

- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/