[PATCH] ext4: ext4_orphan_add() remove unnecessary comments

[PATCH] ext4: ext4_orphan_add() remove unnecessary comments

[Lukas Czerner]

The comment from Al Viro about possible race in the ext4_orphan_add() is
not justified. There is no race possible as we always have either i_mutex
locked, or the inode can not be referenced from outside hence the
J_ASSERS should not be hit from the reason described in comment.

This commit replaces it with notion that we are holding i_mutex so it
should not be possible for i_nlink to be changed while waiting for
s_orphan_lock.

Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
---
 fs/ext4/namei.c |   17 +++++------------
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
index b754b77..8dde5ab 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -1989,18 +1989,11 @@ int ext4_orphan_add(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode)
 	if (!list_empty(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_orphan))
 		goto out_unlock;
 
-	/* Orphan handling is only valid for files with data blocks
-	 * being truncated, or files being unlinked. */

Re: [PATCH] ext4: ext4_orphan_add() remove unnecessary comments

[Ted Ts'o]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 04:50:17PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> The comment from Al Viro about possible race in the ext4_orphan_add() is
> not justified. There is no race possible as we always have either i_mutex
> locked, or the inode can not be referenced from outside hence the
> J_ASSERS should not be hit from the reason described in comment.
> 
> This commit replaces it with notion that we are holding i_mutex so it
> should not be possible for i_nlink to be changed while waiting for
> s_orphan_lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>

Applied, thanks.

						- Ted