From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p7U6dq3c118035 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:39:53 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 5BD4E13AD537 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id TYeklDOlYcjcNZyo for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:43:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 02:39:49 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: fix xfs_mark_inode_dirty during umount Message-ID: <20110830063949.GA19262@infradead.org> References: <20110827055731.GA24159@infradead.org> <20110827055744.GA28351@infradead.org> <20110830062416.GN3162@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110830062416.GN3162@dastard> 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: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 04:24:16PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > xfs_mark_inode_dirty_sync( > > @@ -82,6 +81,10 @@ xfs_mark_inode_dirty_sync( > > > > if (!(inode->i_state & (I_WILL_FREE|I_FREEING))) > > mark_inode_dirty_sync(inode); > > + else { > > + barrier(); > > + ip->i_update_core = 1; > > + } > > } > > Why the barrier()? Isn't that just a compiler barrier? If you are > worried about catching the update vs clearing it in transaction > commit, shouldn't that use smp_mb() instead (in both places)? It's a blind copy & past from xfs_fs_dirty_inode. The comments there suggests it is for update ordering. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs