1 files changed, 0 insertions, 18 deletions

diff --git a/fs/ubifs/dir.c b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
index 14f64b689d7f..7217d67a80a6 100644
--- a/fs/ubifs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/ubifs/dir.c
@@ -522,24 +522,6 @@ static int ubifs_link(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct inode *dir,
         ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&dir->i_mutex));
         ubifs_assert(mutex_is_locked(&inode->i_mutex));
 
-        /*
-         * Return -ENOENT if we've raced with unlink and i_nlink is 0.  Doing
-         * otherwise has the potential to corrupt the orphan inode list.
-         *
-         * Indeed, consider a scenario when 'vfs_link(dirA/fileA)' and
-         * 'vfs_unlink(dirA/fileA, dirB/fileB)' race. 'vfs_link()' does not
-         * lock 'dirA->i_mutex', so this is possible. Both of the functions
-         * lock 'fileA->i_mutex' though. Suppose 'vfs_unlink()' wins, and takes
-         * 'fileA->i_mutex' mutex first. Suppose 'fileA->i_nlink' is 1. In this
-         * case 'ubifs_unlink()' will drop the last reference, and put 'inodeA'
-         * to the list of orphans. After this, 'vfs_link()' will link
-         * 'dirB/fileB' to 'inodeA'. This is a problem because, for example,
-         * the subsequent 'vfs_unlink(dirB/fileB)' will add the same inode
-         * to the list of orphans.
-         */
-         if (inode->i_nlink == 0)
-                 return -ENOENT;
-
         err = dbg_check_synced_i_size(inode);
         if (err)
                 return err;