Re: spin_lock() needed ?

[Artem Bityuckiy <dedekind@oktetlabs.ru>]

> I think you're right -- if the first node in the per-inode list is
> obsolete, then this can happen. README.Locking agrees with this
> assessment. 
> 
> But I'm not sure the first node _can_ be obsolete. After all, nodes
> become obsolete because we do something to make them so, and we can only
> do that by writing a _new_ node... which ends up at the head of the
> list.
Hmm, true.
> 
> But it certainly wants a bloody great comment to that effect, at the
> very least -- I suppose we might as well just take the lock.
> 
> In fact I suspect it may be possible to get an obsolete node at the head
> of the list, immediately after booting. There's no real ordering on the
> list at that point. 
Yes, and it seems not only "immediately after booting", but as long as a 
file wasn't changed after booting...

So, it seems the lock would be good.

Thanks for comment. I'll try to fix this.


-- 
Best regards, Artem B. Bityuckiy
Oktet Labs (St. Petersburg), Software Engineer.
+78124286709 (office) +79112449030 (mobile)
E-mail: dedekind@oktetlabs.ru, web: http://www.oktetlabs.ru