lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: hugetlb locking bug.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:19:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 16:57 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >>
> >> Because it doesn't use iget or unlock_new_inode, but rather calls
> >> directly into new_inode(). ?It and other filesystems not using
> >> unlock_new_inode will need a local copy of that logic.
> >
> > Is there a sane reason they do their own magic, and thus need a copy of
> > the logic, instead of using the generic code that already has it?
>
> Hmm. That all seems to be just an oversight.
>
> Does this trivial one-liner work?
>
> (Warning: whitespace damage and TOTALLY UNTESTED)

It'll get rid of the lockdep spat in favour of a WARN_ON, given that
inodes from new_inode() never have I_NEW set.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-15 23:29    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans