From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Dushistov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5]: ufs: missed brelse and wrong baseblk Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 20:30:45 +0400 Message-ID: <20060620163045.GA17903@rain.homenetwork> References: <20060617101403.GA22098@rain.homenetwork> <20060618162054.GW27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20060618175045.GX27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20060619064721.GA6106@rain.homenetwork> <20060619073229.GI27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20060619131750.GA14770@rain.homenetwork> <20060619182833.GJ27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20060619185816.GA26513@rain.homenetwork> <20060619191306.GK27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx1.mail.ru ([194.67.23.121]:52832 "EHLO mx1.mail.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751389AbWFTQZO (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:25:14 -0400 To: Al Viro Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060619191306.GK27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:13:06PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Which is fsck-all protection, since then you proceed to do a lot of > blocking operations. Now, lock_super() down in balloc.c _might_ be > enough, but I wouldn't bet on that. There is still leak of proper locking model for inode's metadata, for example we don't lock/unlock buffer_head when check if we've already allocated block or not, so lock_kernel still necessary. -- /Evgeniy