From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n23H3FMk024446 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 11:03:16 -0600 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:02:48 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: next-20090220: XFS: inconsistent lock state Message-ID: <20090303170248.GA7036@infradead.org> References: <20090224200740.GA9266@infradead.org> <49AD5401.30803@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Felix Blyakher Cc: Eric Sandeen , LKML , xfs@oss.sgi.com, Christoph Hellwig , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Beregalov On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 10:57:07AM -0600, Felix Blyakher wrote: > if (lock_flags) { > if (!xfs_ilock_nowait(ip, lock_flags)) { > ASSERT(0); > error = EAGAIN; > goto out_destroy; > } > } > > Or just keep the BUG(); , as it shouldn't happen (we hope). Ok, let's keep the BUG for now and I'll throw in your error undwinding fix. Will resend the series for 2.6.29 patches after QAing them. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs