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 n8AG7dJ0225860 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:07:56 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 6686443F2AD for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id umhFa49IH2OCxAR4 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1MlmC3-0005XK-PP for xfs@oss.sgi.com; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:08:19 +0000 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:08:19 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: PATCH] xfs: implement .dirty_inode to fix timestamp handling Message-ID: <20090910160819.GA21031@infradead.org> References: <20090827031242.GB6147@infradead.org> <20090901180820.GB26071@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090901180820.GB26071@infradead.org> 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: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 02:08:20PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I managed to trigger the ASSERT in the reclaim path, so it looks both > this version and our previous code is buggy. It's back to the drawing > board for now until I gifure out what's going on. Okay, figured it out - didn't actually test the asserts as the were added last minute. Looks like we could always (before and after the patch) get into the reclaim path with the timestamp in the xfs inode not uptodate, and due to the I_CLEAR check we would never update it. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs