Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: protect inode->i_state with inode->i_lock

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 - 1:58 am

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 03:23:01PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:

If you want to remove inode_lock from the lru scanning later you already
need to extend i_lock coverage to include __iget here.  Otherwise we
could race to mark the inode as I_FREEING or I_WILL_FREE before we
grabbed a reference after your patchset. 
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: protect inode->i_state with inode->i_lock, Christian Stroetmann, (Wed Oct 27, 12:07 am)
Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: protect inode->i_state with inode->i_lock, Christoph Hellwig, (Wed Oct 27, 1:58 am)