From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756088AbZCEKQu (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 05:16:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752826AbZCEKQl (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 05:16:41 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:41290 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751431AbZCEKQk (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2009 05:16:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 11:16:37 +0100 From: Nick Piggin To: Jan Kara Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , "Jorge Boncompte [DTI2]" , Adrian Hunter , stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] fs: new inode i_state corruption fix Message-ID: <20090305101637.GB17815@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090305064554.GA11916@wotan.suse.de> <20090305100000.GA29177@duck.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090305100000.GA29177@duck.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:00:01AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 05-03-09 07:45:54, Nick Piggin wrote: > > after ~1hour of running. Previously, the new warnings would start immediately > > and hang would happen in under 5 minutes. > A quick grep seems to indicate that you've still missed a few cases, > haven't you? I still see the same problem in > drop_caches.c:drop_pagecache_sb() scanning, inode.c:invalidate_inodes() > scanning, and dquot.c:add_dquot_ref() scanning. > Otherwise the patch looks fine. I thought they should be OK; drop_pagecache_sb doesn't play with flags, invalidate_inodes won't if refcount is elevated, and I think add_dquot_ref won't if writecount is not elevated... But maybe that's abit fragile and it would be better policy to always skip I_NEW in these traverals?