From: Tao Ma <redacted>

In 85fe4025, Christoph removed get_next_ino() from new_inode() and
do s_buddy_cache->i_ino = get_next_ino();
And then 48e6061b gives EXT4_BAD_INO to this inode. But actually
s_buddy_cache is used directly and we never get it from an inode number.
So it should be safe for us to not set i_ino at all and I guess that
is the case Christoph described in his commit log of 85fe4025
"For a few more filesystems we can avoid assigning any inode number given
that they aren't user visible".

Cc: Yu Jian <redacted>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <redacted>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Tao Ma <redacted>
---
 fs/ext4/mballoc.c |    5 -----
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index 17a5a57..982f783 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c

@@ -2342,11 +2342,6 @@ static int ext4_mb_init_backend(struct super_block *sb)
 		ext4_msg(sb, KERN_ERR, "can't get new inode");
 		goto err_freesgi;
 	}
-	/* To avoid potentially colliding with an valid on-disk inode number,
-	 * use EXT4_BAD_INO for the buddy cache inode number.  This inode is
-	 * not in the inode hash, so it should never be found by iget(), but
-	 * this will avoid confusion if it ever shows up during debugging. */
-	sbi->s_buddy_cache->i_ino = EXT4_BAD_INO;
 	EXT4_I(sbi->s_buddy_cache)->i_disksize = 0;
 	for (i = 0; i < ngroups; i++) {
 		desc = ext4_get_group_desc(sb, i, NULL);

-- 
1.7.0.4