don't expose I_NEW inodes via dentry->d_inode
d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
unlock_new_inode(inode);
is a bad idea; do it the other way round...
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
index 3916be1..8567fb8 100644
--- a/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/reiserfs/namei.c
@@ -634,8 +634,8 @@
reiserfs_update_inode_transaction(inode);
reiserfs_update_inode_transaction(dir);
- d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
unlock_new_inode(inode);
+ d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
retval = journal_end(&th, dir->i_sb, jbegin_count);
out_failed:
@@ -712,8 +712,8 @@
goto out_failed;
}
- d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
unlock_new_inode(inode);
+ d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
retval = journal_end(&th, dir->i_sb, jbegin_count);
out_failed:
@@ -800,8 +800,8 @@
// the above add_entry did not update dir's stat data
reiserfs_update_sd(&th, dir);
- d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
unlock_new_inode(inode);
+ d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
retval = journal_end(&th, dir->i_sb, jbegin_count);
out_failed:
reiserfs_write_unlock_once(dir->i_sb, lock_depth);
@@ -1096,8 +1096,8 @@
goto out_failed;
}
- d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
unlock_new_inode(inode);
+ d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
retval = journal_end(&th, parent_dir->i_sb, jbegin_count);
out_failed:
reiserfs_write_unlock(parent_dir->i_sb);