| title: | Re PATCH 09 32 Unionfs cache coherency |
|
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 08:52:17AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Sep 2 2007 22:20, Josef Jeff Sipek wrote:
@@ -184,10 +183,92 @@ out:
}
/*
+ * Determine if the lower inode objects have changed from below the unionfs
+ * inode. Return 1 if changed, 0 otherwise.
+ */
+int is_newer_lower(const struct dentry *dentry)
Could use bool and true/false as return value.
I remember that way back when there was a discussion about the bool type.
What how did that end? Is bool preferred?
-int __unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd)
+int __unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd,
+ int willwrite)
also looks like a bool (willwrite)
Right.
- if (!__unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(dentry, NULL)) {
+ if (!__unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(dentry, NULL, 0)) {
(Are there any callers with ,1?)
Indirectly yes. There are callers that pass a value they get. Very large
majority is 0.
Jeff.
--
Bad pun of the week: The formula 1 control computer suffered from a race
condition
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at rel="nofollow" vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
