vfs: rename 'do_follow_link' to 'should_follow_link'
Al points out that the do_follow_link() helper function really is misnamed - it's about whether we should try to follow a symlink or not, not about actually doing the following. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
206b1d09a5
commit
7813b94a54
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
|
@ -1267,7 +1267,7 @@ static void terminate_walk(struct nameidata *nd)
|
|||
* so we keep a cache of "no, this doesn't need follow_link"
|
||||
* for the common case.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static inline int do_follow_link(struct inode *inode, int follow)
|
||||
static inline int should_follow_link(struct inode *inode, int follow)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (unlikely(!(inode->i_opflags & IOP_NOFOLLOW))) {
|
||||
if (likely(inode->i_op->follow_link))
|
||||
|
@ -1303,7 +1303,7 @@ static inline int walk_component(struct nameidata *nd, struct path *path,
|
|||
terminate_walk(nd);
|
||||
return -ENOENT;
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (do_follow_link(inode, follow)) {
|
||||
if (should_follow_link(inode, follow)) {
|
||||
if (nd->flags & LOOKUP_RCU) {
|
||||
if (unlikely(unlazy_walk(nd, path->dentry))) {
|
||||
terminate_walk(nd);
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue