[Yaffs-archive] Re: [BUG] in yaffs_unlink()

On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 11:52:06AM +1300, Charles Manning wrote:
>
> The way this is supposed to work (Posix) is that if a file is open and it
> gets unlinked, then it disappears from the directory etc but the file is
> still there until the last handle gets closed. These Posix people thought of
> some very nasty things to throw at file system writes.

This behaviour largely predate POSIX but, I think, date from the
beginning of UNIX (more than 30 years ago).
It's a necessity since you can never assume that process will cooperate:
one process can use a file and at the same time a process can remove it,
with this semantic both process can do their jobs correctly.

> The way I designed this to work is that when the file gets unlinked (last
> link) it gets placed in the "unlinked directory" which is not in the
> directory tree. It should only be marked for deletion if the file is already
> closed (or when the file handle is closed).

Is this a necessity? What will/should happen if we just remove the file 
entry from the directory?
i.e: yaffs_unlink()     -> play with the hardlink iplementation
             + yaffs_RemoveObjectFromDirectory()

     yaffs_delete_inode -> yaffs_DeleteWorker()
                         + yaffs_FreeTnode()
                         + yaffs_FreeObject()

?????

>                                             Something is not working properly 
> here :-(.

>
> I thought I had tested this... damn. I will look.

    "It doesn't need to be tested, because it works."
        -- Richard Holloway

-:)

--
Luc Van Oostenryck


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This mailing list is hosted by Toby Churchill open software (www.toby-churchill.org).
If mailing list membership is no longer wanted you can remove yourself from the list by
sending an email to yaffs-request@toby-churchill.org with the text "unsubscribe"
(without the quotes) as the subject.