From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zach Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/30] IGET: Stop BEFS from using iget() and read_inode() Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 10:39:30 -0700 Message-ID: <20071001173930.GA7718@mami.zabbo.net> References: <20071001130921.29339.72876.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20071001130958.29339.31669.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: hch@infradead.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Return-path: Received: from tetsuo.zabbo.net ([207.173.201.20]:48338 "EHLO tetsuo.zabbo.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751691AbXJASFv (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Oct 2007 14:05:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071001130958.29339.31669.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org If you're soliciting opinions, I think I tend to prefer the feel of the code paths after the changes. I don't know the benefits of the change are worth the risk in unmaintained file systems, though. > + return ERR_PTR(PTR_ERR(inode)); This caught my eye. Surely we can do better :). It seems to happen a few times in the patches, the instance in this patch was the first that I noticed. - z