We should not call unlock_new_inode when insert_inode_locked failed.
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <[email protected]>
---
fs/f2fs/namei.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
index 97e97c4..a680bf3 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static struct inode *f2fs_new_inode(struct inode *dir,
umode_t mode)
if (err) {
err = -EINVAL;
nid_free = true;
- goto out;
+ goto fail;
}
/* If the directory encrypted, then we should encrypt the inode. */
@@ -75,9 +75,6 @@ static struct inode *f2fs_new_inode(struct inode *dir,
umode_t mode)
mark_inode_dirty(inode);
return inode;
-out:
- clear_nlink(inode);
- unlock_new_inode(inode);
fail:
trace_f2fs_new_inode(inode, err);
make_bad_inode(inode);
--
2.1.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
