Re: [GIT PULL] UDF tree fixes

[Linus Torvalds]

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)

		Linus
--
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/