From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: The bug of iput() removal from flusher thread?
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:05:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121121000533.a0ab9eea.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121121014851.GH10507@quack.suse.cz>
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 02:48:51 +0100 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> +/*
> + * Add inode to LRU if needed (inode is unused and clean).
> + *
> + * Needs inode->i_lock held.
> + */
> +void inode_add_lru(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> + if (!(inode->i_state & (I_DIRTY | I_FREEING | I_SYNC)) &&
> + !atomic_read(&inode->i_count) && inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_ACTIVE)
> + inode_lru_list_add(inode);
> +}
Is i_lock sufficient to stabilise i_count?
<looks at the code a bit>
Is evict_inodes() wrong to test i_count outside i_lock?
invalidate_inodes() looks better.
can_unuse() must be called under i_lock, and is. Apparently this
requirement was sufficiently obvious to not meed documenting.
prune_icache_sb() gets it right.
iput() gets it right.
So to answer my own question: yes, it is sufficient. But a) the
comment for inode.i_lock is out of date and b) evict_inodes() looks
fishy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-21 8:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-17 8:42 The bug of iput() removal from flusher thread? OGAWA Hirofumi
2012-11-19 8:56 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2012-11-19 14:51 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-19 19:41 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-19 20:51 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2012-11-19 21:24 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-19 21:53 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2012-11-21 1:11 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-21 1:48 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-21 2:44 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-21 17:08 ` Jan Kara
2012-11-21 8:05 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-11-21 8:22 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-20 22:37 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-21 1:30 ` Jan Kara
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=20121121000533.a0ab9eea.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--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).