[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <COL402-EAS29173C752AB35D52DE4243DAB950@phx.gbl>
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 14:30:15 +0800
From: Chao Yu <yuchaochina@...mail.com>
To: "'Jaegeuk Kim'" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent_cache by default
Hi Jaegeuk,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2015 1:16 PM
> To: Chao Yu
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent_cache by default
[snip]
> > > @@ -237,10 +237,11 @@ void update_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page)
> > > ri->i_size = cpu_to_le64(i_size_read(inode));
> > > ri->i_blocks = cpu_to_le64(inode->i_blocks);
> > >
> > > - read_lock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock);
> > > - set_raw_extent(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext, &ri->i_ext);
> > > - read_unlock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock);
> > > -
> > > + if (F2FS_I(inode)->extent_tree)
> >
> > Could extent cache destroy after above check?
>
> I don't think so.
>
> The extent_tree is assigned as one way.
> Once it is assigned, it will be deallocated only after evict_inode.
Previously, I suspected that ->write_inode and ->evict will be executed
concurrently.
After checking the code, I find that would not happen, so we are safe.
Thanks,
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > Thanks,
--
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