"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com> writes:The symlink is gone by the real directory remains? Darn. It appears we have a regression in this patchset. That part used to work. I was thinking of blaming sysfs_rename_link. But it the links are fine so it looks more likely that sysfs has morphed once again and we have a reference counting issue or something similar. Yuck. d_move and the other moves should have worked. From a purely get the good less controversial parts of this patchset in. I suggest we look at patches 7/10 and 8/10 (without the tag_ops). And introduce and start using sysfs_delete_link and sysfs_rename_link. That code seems pretty stable and is generally a code reduction all by itself by reducing a common idiom into a single function. Eric --
