Re: [patch] Fix xfs_iunpin() sets I_DIRTY_SYNC after clear_inode().

Takenori Nagano
2006-10-20T04:26:39Z

Hi,

David Chinner wrote:
> I don't think so - in the lookup code where we find an existing
> inode, we don't destroy the inode if XFS_IRECLAIMABLE is set.
> Instead we do a log force and repeat the lookup. We only destroy
> the inode in xfs_iget_core() if we raced with another thread
> reading the inode in off disk after the cache lookup has
> failed. In this case, we free the inode we read off disk which,
> by definition, cannot be dirty or pinned at this point so we
> don't need to wait for anything to be unpinned.
>
> In the case of reclaim, when we flush a dirty inode we already
> do a xfs_iunpin_wait() (xfs_finish_reclaim()->xfs_iflush()->wait)
> so we should never get to the point of xfs_idestroy with an inode
> that is still pinned.
>
> Hence I don't think this is patch is necessary. Did I miss something
> that I shouldn't have, Takenori?

Sorry, you are right. I forgot xfs_iget_core() was modified that it don't reuse
xfs_inode while i_pincount > 0.

>
> FYI, the three patches have survived my testing for almost a day now,
> so if they pass your testing I think we have a viable fix. I'll
> sned out a set of updated patches later this afternoon.

Your patches have been working well for 20 hours. I intend to continue
testing your patches until next Monday, and I'll report the result.

Best Regards,
--
Takenori Nagano
<t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com>