From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:51846 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S933262AbeFUMWC (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:22:02 -0400
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 05:22:01 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
        viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] VFS: call d_inode() from d_backing_inode()
Message-ID: <20180621122201.GB14053@infradead.org>
References: <20180620193910.6804-1-rgoldwyn@suse.de>
 <20180620193910.6804-4-rgoldwyn@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180620193910.6804-4-rgoldwyn@suse.de>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 02:39:10PM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote:
> -static inline struct dentry *d_backing_dentry(struct dentry *upper)
> +static inline struct inode *d_backing_inode(const struct dentry *dentry)
>  {
> -	return upper;
> +	return d_inode(dentry);
>  }

Why even keep both functions around then?