Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: SLUB defrag pull request? | From | Miklos Szeredi <> | Date | Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:27:25 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > > In many cases, yes it seems to. And some of the approaches even if > > they work now seem like they *might* cause problematic constraints > > in the design... Have Al and Christoph reviewed the dentry and inode > > patches? > > This d_invalidate() looks suspicious to me:
And the things kick_inodes() does without any sort of locking look even more dangerous.
It should be the other way round: first make sure nothing is referencing the inode, and _then_ start cleaning it up with appropriate locks held. See prune_icache().
Miklos
| |