lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 14/18] fs: Protect inode->i_state with th einode->i_lock
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:57:09PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > Ah, done thinking now! I was so the i_state field had been set
> > > before the inode was added to various lists and potentially
> > > accessable to other threads. I should probably add a comment to that
> > > effect, right?
> >
> > Yes, please.
>
> This is due to i_lock not covering all the icache state of the inode,
> so you have to make these synchronisation changes like this.
>
> I much prefer such proposals to go at the end of my series, where I
> will probably nack them (and use rcu instead if the remaining trylocks
> are such a big issue).

To get back to the context - what it changes is setting up i_state =
I_NEW before adding the inode to the sb-list and the hash. Making
sure objects are fully set up before adding to a list is always a good
idea, and really has nothing to do with RCU.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-16 18:21    [W:0.091 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site