Re: locking rules for ->dirty_inode()

Andrew Morton
2002-09-20T22:36:16Z

Nikita Danilov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Documentation/filesystems/Locking states that all super operations may
> block, but __set_page_dirty_buffers() calls
>
> __mark_inode_dirty()->s_op->dirty_inode()
>
> under mapping->private_lock spin lock.

Actually it doesn't. We do not call down into the filesystem
for I_DIRTY_PAGES.

set_page_dirty() is already called under locks, via __free_pte (pagetable
teardown). 2.4 does this as well.

But I'll make the change anyway. I think it removes any
ranking requirements between mapping->page_lock and
mapping->private_lock, which is always a nice thing.