lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch 29/52] fs: icache lock i_count
    On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:41PM +1000, npiggin@suse.de wrote:
    > Protect inode->i_count with i_lock, rather than having it atomic.
    > Next step should also be to move things together (eg. the refcount increment
    > into d_instantiate, which will remove a lock/unlock cycle on i_lock).
    .....
    > Index: linux-2.6/fs/inode.c
    > ===================================================================
    > --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/inode.c
    > +++ linux-2.6/fs/inode.c
    > @@ -33,14 +33,13 @@
    > * inode_hash_lock protects:
    > * inode hash table, i_hash
    > * inode->i_lock protects:
    > - * i_state
    > + * i_state, i_count
    > *
    > * Ordering:
    > * inode_lock
    > * sb_inode_list_lock
    > * inode->i_lock
    > - * inode_lock
    > - * inode_hash_lock
    > + * inode_hash_lock
    > */

    I thought that the rule governing the use of inode->i_lock was that
    it can be used anywhere as long as it is the innermost lock.

    Hmmm, no references in the code or documentation. Google gives a
    pretty good reference:

    http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org/msg02584.html

    Perhaps a different/new lock needs to be used here?

    Cheers,

    Dave.
    --
    Dave Chinner
    david@fromorbit.com


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-06-30 09:31    [W:0.021 / U:1.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site