From 58d86a50eee6f8d5a4768f739d10d94f9994180f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Wang Shilong Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:17:29 -0500 Subject: ext4: update comments regarding ext4_delete_inode() ext4_delete_inode() has been renamed for a long time, update comments for this. Signed-off-by: Wang Shilong Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o --- fs/ext4/inode.c | 2 +- fs/ext4/migrate.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'fs/ext4') diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c index b416b461fa50..5653fa42930b 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c @@ -3620,7 +3620,7 @@ out_stop: * If this was a simple ftruncate() and the file will remain alive, * then we need to clear up the orphan record which we created above. * However, if this was a real unlink then we were called by - * ext4_delete_inode(), and we allow that function to clean up the + * ext4_evict_inode(), and we allow that function to clean up the * orphan info for us. */ if (inode->i_nlink) diff --git a/fs/ext4/migrate.c b/fs/ext4/migrate.c index a432634f2e6a..3cb267aee802 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/migrate.c +++ b/fs/ext4/migrate.c @@ -592,7 +592,7 @@ err_out: /* * set the i_blocks count to zero - * so that the ext4_delete_inode does the + * so that the ext4_evict_inode() does the * right job * * We don't need to take the i_lock because -- cgit v1.2.3