From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs pile 1
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 07:40:01 -0500
Message-ID: <20120111124001.GA834@infradead.org>
References: <20120105022318.GG23916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFw+7xvfP3NCr5p2Ma--UTb7zT+QQxtjCn3V2SU_g3LUdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120111115846.GA2646@infradead.org>
 <1326285382.13736.4.camel@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1326285382.13736.4.camel@tucsk.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 01:36:22PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> There are a couple of options:
> 
> a) leave it as it is
> 
> b) change that set_nlink() in xfs into a 
> 
>   if (nlink)
> 	set_nlink(nlink);
>   else
> 	clear_nlink();
> 
> c) remove the printk from set_nlink().  This effectively makes
> set_nlink(0) an alias of clear_nlink().
> 
> IIRC your preference is c.  What do others think?

Yes.  a) really isn't an option - we don't want to spew thousands of
useless messages during a log recovery for an operation that's totally
normal.  b) is okay, too - but it's not just xfs that needs to be
covered, but any fs that support the concept of recovering from open
but unlinked inodes after a crash.  It's just that no one else seems
to have regular QA for that code path.