From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: factor inode disposal
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 03:55:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101027075520.GA11384@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288153384-8878-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
> /*
> + * Free the inode passed in, removing it from the lists it is still connected
> + * to but avoiding unnecessary lock round-trips for the lists it is no longer
> + * on.
> + *
> + * An inode must already be marked I_FREEING so that we avoid the inode being
> + * moved back onto lists if we race with other code that manipulates the lists
> + * (e.g. writeback_single_inode_inode). The caller is responsisble for setting this.
Too long line.
> + */
> +static void dispose_one_inode(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> + BUG_ON(!(inode->i_state & I_FREEING));
> +
> + spin_lock(&inode_lock);
> + list_del_init(&inode->i_wb_list);
> + __remove_inode_hash(inode);
> + __inode_sb_list_del(inode);
> + spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
> +
> + evict(inode);
> +
> + wake_up_inode(inode);
> + BUG_ON(inode->i_state != (I_FREEING | I_CLEAR));
> + destroy_inode(inode);
> +}
As this is the only caller of evict left I think the code should just
be added to evict instead of a new function. Also the hash removal
should happen after evict, so that __wait_on_freeing_inode still works.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-27 7:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-27 4:23 fs: break out inode LRU operations from node_lock Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 4:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] fs: protect inode->i_state with inode->i_lock Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 7:07 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-10-27 8:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-27 4:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] fs: factor inode disposal Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 7:55 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-10-27 9:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-27 4:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] fs: Lock the inode LRU list separately Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 7:08 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-10-27 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-27 22:24 ` Dave Chinner
2010-10-28 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-28 10:58 ` Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 4:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] fs: remove inode_lock from iput_final and prune_icache Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 4:40 ` Al Viro
2010-10-27 4:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-10-27 5:25 ` Al Viro
2010-10-27 5:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-10-27 6:01 ` Al Viro
2010-10-27 6:09 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2010-10-27 7:11 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-10-27 9:12 ` Dave Chinner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-10-27 23:02 fs: break out inode LRU operations from inode_lock V2 Dave Chinner
2010-10-27 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/4] fs: factor inode disposal Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101027075520.GA11384@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).