![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton writes: > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > [...] > > struct inode *inode; > > > > inode = list_entry(head->next, struct inode, i_list); > > - list_del(&inode->i_list); > > + list_del_init(&inode->i_list); > > > > if (inode->i_data.nrpages) > > truncate_inode_pages(&inode->i_data, 0); > > > > That's i_list, not i_hash. > > Yes, it's a bit sloppy to leave the i_list pointers dangling but > fs/inode.c:new_inode() will just overwrite i_list and all is well. > > Could you please double-check or clarify the need for this change? You are right, sorry. Probably I stared at these lists for too long or too short a time. We are seeing garbage on sb->s_io in sync_sb_inodes(), but probably this is some reiser4 problem after all. Nikita. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 11:31 [W:1.172 / U:0.040 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||