Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: remove readonly checks from xfs_release & xfs_inactive

[Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 05:16:07PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 3/13/17 8:23 AM, Brian Foster wrote:
> > I think some ASSERT(!ro) calls would be prudent in the newly reachable
> > codepaths that would make modifications (in both xfs_release() and
> > xfs_inactive()), just to catch any future bugs that would otherwise go
> > undetected. Otherwise, both patches seem reasonable to me.
> 
> Ok, well - we can't assert (!ro) because we /do/ get here in the early
> stages of an ro mount.
> 

Ok, I suppose we'd have to filter out from "mounting" context. That is
only for the case where we run log recovery though, right?

> I want to rework all this like Dave had suggested, but it's not getting
> done this release cycle, and I thought a couple targeted changes like this
> which fix the bug without making the code beautiful might still make it :)
> 
> Maybe the best shortcut for now is to stash, remove, and replace the RO
> mount flag like we do for log recovery itself, and clean it all up in
> the next round.
> 

Hmm, that does sound like a cleaner approach.

Brian

> -Eric
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html