Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1592365

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 29/30] fs: track whether the i_version has been queried with an i_state flag

From Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC PATCH v1 29/30] fs: track whether the i_version has been queried with an i_state flag
Date 2017-03-04 02:00 +0100
Message-ID <th6dc-Gi-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <sQSyR-6ed-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sQSyS-6ed-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <th5K9-wg-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, 2017-03-04 at 11:03 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21 2016, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> > @@ -2072,7 +2093,12 @@ inode_cmp_iversion(const struct inode *inode, const u64 old)
> >  static inline bool
> >  inode_iversion_need_inc(struct inode *inode)
> >  {
> > -	return true;
> > +	bool ret;
> > +
> > +	spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> > +	ret = inode->i_state & I_VERS_BUMP;
> > +	spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> > +	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> 
> I know this code gets removed, so this isn't really important.
> By why do you take the spinlock here?  What are you racing again?
> 
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown

I think I was worried about I_VERS_BUMP being set or cleared during an
increment or query. It is quite possible that that spinlock is not
necessary.
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 29/30] fs: track whether the i_version has been queried with an i_state flag NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> - 2017-03-04 01:30 +0100
  Re: [RFC PATCH v1 29/30] fs: track whether the i_version has been  queried with an i_state flag Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-03-04 02:00 +0100

csiph-web