[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 14/18] fs: Protect inode->i_state with th einode->i_lock
    On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:18:43AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig 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).

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-10-16 10:01    [W:0.018 / U:4.128 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site