From ff273cb879fbc6cd3c5d03a56cfc33f5830e2837 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steve French Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:17:12 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] [CIFS] Remove obsolete comment Signed-off-by: Steven French --- fs/cifs/link.c | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/cifs/link.c b/fs/cifs/link.c index 190bf0eb71b0..2ec6037f61c7 100644 --- a/fs/cifs/link.c +++ b/fs/cifs/link.c @@ -592,11 +592,7 @@ cifs_hardlink(struct dentry *old_file, struct inode *inode, spin_lock(&old_file->d_inode->i_lock); inc_nlink(old_file->d_inode); spin_unlock(&old_file->d_inode->i_lock); - /* - * BB should we make this contingent on superblock flag - * NOATIME? - */ - /* old_file->d_inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME; */ + /* * parent dir timestamps will update from srv within a * second, would it really be worth it to set the parent @@ -606,7 +602,9 @@ cifs_hardlink(struct dentry *old_file, struct inode *inode, } /* * if not oplocked will force revalidate to get info on source - * file from srv + * file from srv. Note Samba server prior to 4.2 has bug - + * not updating src file ctime on hardlinks but Windows servers + * handle it properly */ cifsInode->time = 0; -- 2.20.1