From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id mB46RVoU029105 for ; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 00:27:31 -0600 Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A15BEAC012 for ; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 22:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [134.14.55.78] (redback.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.55.78]) by larry.melbourne.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id RAA20685 for ; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 17:27:24 +1100 Message-ID: <49377863.1070109@sgi.com> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:27:47 +1100 From: Lachlan McIlroy MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [PATCH] Remove unnecessary assertion Reply-To: lachlan@sgi.com 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 Hit this assert because an inode was tagged with XFS_ICI_RECLAIM_TAG but not XFS_IRECLAIMABLE|XFS_IRECLAIM. This is because xfs_iget_cache_hit() first clears XFS_IRECLAIMABLE and then calls __xfs_inode_clear_reclaim_tag() while only holding the pag_ici_lock in read mode so we can race with xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag(). Looks like xfs_reclaim_inodes_ag() will do the right thing anyway so just remove the assert. Thanks to Christoph for pointing out where the problem was. --- xfs-fix.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.c +++ xfs-fix/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.c @@ -707,8 +707,6 @@ restart: break; } - ASSERT(xfs_iflags_test(ip, (XFS_IRECLAIMABLE|XFS_IRECLAIM))); - /* ignore if already under reclaim */ if (xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_IRECLAIM)) { read_unlock(&pag->pag_ici_lock); _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs