[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101008094117.GY19804@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:41:17 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/18] fs: Factor inode hash operations into functions
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 03:29:47AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:21:24PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
> >
> > Before replacing the inode hash locking with a more scalable
> > mechanism, factor the removal of the inode from the hashes rather
> > than open coding it in several places.
> >
> > Based on a patch originally from Nick Piggin.
>
> Looks good as an equal transformation, but what code is doing with
> remove_inode_hash looks really buggy. It's doing a re-hash of a live
> inode which is probably causing enough problems by itself, but should
> at least have locks for it. Anyway, that's something for the coda folks
> to sort out.
Known problem; nobody got around to fixing it. But if that's going where
I think it's going, the problem has just got nastier... We do need locking
around there anyway; current use of BKL to protect lists in psdev stuff
is not good.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists