From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3B4C432C2 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 13:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9814121D81 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 13:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2407000AbfIYNsY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:48:24 -0400 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.188]:2485 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2405963AbfIYNsY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:48:24 -0400 Received: from DGGEMM406-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.57]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 953ADF9E6B6000EE6D6D; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 21:48:22 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) by DGGEMM406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 21:48:22 +0800 Received: from architecture4 (10.140.130.215) by dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 21:48:21 +0800 Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 21:47:06 +0800 From: Gao Xiang To: Chao Yu CC: , , Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix comment of f2fs_evict_inode Message-ID: <20190925134706.GA157912@architecture4> References: <20190925093050.118921-1-yuchao0@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190925093050.118921-1-yuchao0@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Originating-IP: [10.140.130.215] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggeme708-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.104) To dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Chao, On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 05:30:50PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > evict() should be called once i_count is zero, rather than i_nlinke > is zero. > > Reported-by: Gao Xiang > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu > --- > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index db4fec30c30d..8262f4a483d3 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -632,7 +632,7 @@ int f2fs_write_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc) > } > > /* > - * Called at the last iput() if i_nlink is zero > + * Called at the last iput() if i_count is zero Yeah, I'd suggest taking some time to look at other inconsistent comments, it makes other folks confused and ask me with such-"strong" reason... Thanks, Gao Xiang > */ > void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) > { > -- > 2.18.0.rc1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel