From 8fc37ec54cd8e37193b0d42809b785ff19661c34 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Al Viro Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:18:15 +0400 Subject: 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 --- fs/ecryptfs/inode.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'fs/ecryptfs') diff --git a/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c b/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c index da52cdbe8388..ffa2be57804d 100644 --- a/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c @@ -269,8 +269,8 @@ ecryptfs_create(struct inode *directory_inode, struct dentry *ecryptfs_dentry, iput(ecryptfs_inode); goto out; } - d_instantiate(ecryptfs_dentry, ecryptfs_inode); unlock_new_inode(ecryptfs_inode); + d_instantiate(ecryptfs_dentry, ecryptfs_inode); out: return rc; } -- cgit v1.2.1