Messages in this thread | | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:07:06 +1100 | Subject | Re: Race between generic_forget_inode() and sync_sb_inodes()? |
| |
Hi David,
On Friday November 30, dgc@sgi.com wrote: > > > I came across this because I've been making changes to XFS to avoid the > inode hash, and I've found that I need to remove the inode from the > dirty list when setting I_WILL_FREE to avoid this race. I can't see > how this race is avoided when inodes are hashed, so I'm wondering > if we've just been lucky or there's something that I'm missing that > means the above does not occur.
Looking at inode.c in 2.6.23-mm1, in generic_forget_inode, I see code:
if (!hlist_unhashed(&inode->i_hash)) { if (!(inode->i_state & (I_DIRTY|I_SYNC))) list_move(&inode->i_list, &inode_unused);
so it looks to me like: If the inode is hashed and dirty, then move it (off the s_dirty list) to inode_unused.
So it seems to me that generic_forget_inode also finds it needs to remove the inode from the dirty list when setting I_WILL_FREE.
Maybe we are looking at different kernel versions? Maybe I misunderstood your problem?
NeilBrown - 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/
| |