lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
From
Date
Hello

On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 13:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 11:54:58PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > reiser4
>
> So looking over the code a little for the plugin debate I found that a
> reason patch introduces a ->put_inode method in reiser4. We plan to
> kill ->put_inode because it's the wrong abstraction and almost impossible
> to use non-racy (reiser4 usage is racy).

Sorry, would you please explain what is wrong in having the below

if (inode->i_nlink != 0 || atomic_read(&inode->i_count) > 1)
in reiser4_put_inode.


> I had a discussion with someone from namesys how to solve this correctly,

We were trying to avoid need to have reiser4_drop_inode because you said
drop_inode is a hack for hugetlbfs.

The problem is that on file removal reiser4 wants to do
truncate_inode_pages in reiser4_delete_inode. We used reiser4_drop_inode
for that. As long as drop_inode was about to die, we decided to do file
predeletion in reiser4_put_inode when inode is about to get into
iput_final with inode->i_nlink == 0.

It is a pity that put_inode is also wrong abstraction.

> but I don't remember the details of either the solution or problem anymore.

You said:
--------
So what you want is actually to move the truncate_inode_pages out of
generic_delete_inode and into ->delete_inode?

Looking at the code another strategt makes more sense:

- move the truncate_inode_pages at the beginning of clear_inode.
All callers but one already do it just before that call, but
the one that doesn't will require a full audit of all ->delete_inode
instances
- make the first half of clear_inode into a helper (__clear_inode or
whatever), and make ->clear_inode responsible for calling it as first
thing for a normal fs or call it in clear_inode if ->clear_inode
doesn't
exist. that way we can also move the invalidate_inode_buffers out
there
easily later for filesystems that don't use buffer_heads at all.

p.s. please try to keep -fsdevel Cc'ed on the mail related to core
changes
-------
I hoped that we can solve the problem internally in reiser4. If
put_inode is about to be removed we will have to do ssomething like
that.


> Unless someone else does let's describe the problem again so we can find
> a proper fix.
> -
> 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/
>

-
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: 2005-06-27 17:36    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean