lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.4.20pre5aa1
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:59:17PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > I think we should take the XFS-specific inode lock around vmtruncate.
> > Need to double-check with Steve.
>
> this is the function I'm looking at and it's called with xfs specific
> inode lock, and I don't see it grabbed either before calling vmtruncate:

should != do

we either need to use your accessors for i_size or take the XFS inode
lock around vmtruncate.
-
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 13:28    [W:0.093 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site