Hi, I'll have to look a bit more closely... but your patch does look correct.
Back in 2000 (v. 1.279), it was as you suggest, but Steve changed it.
(The Irix code also has your "new" test.)
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, ASANO Masahiro wrote:
> I have a question.
> Why don't we sync the last xfs_inode in xfs_syncsub()?
> I am wondering if the condition check is wrong... (see below)
> --- linux/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c Thu Oct 24 07:46:17 2002
> +++ linux/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c.new Mon Oct 28 11:29:21 2002
> @@ -1433,7 +1433,7 @@
> ASSERT(ipointer_in == B_FALSE);
> ip = ip->i_mnext;
> - } while (ip->i_mnext != mp->m_inodes);
> + } while (ip != mp->m_inodes);