xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:53:15 -0400
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick Schreurs <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tommy van Leeuwen <tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bas Couwenberg <bas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS List <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20091019011710.GP9464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20090930124104.GA7463@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AC60D27.9060703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091005214348.GA15448@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4ACB080D.3010708@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091007011926.GB32032@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AD18C8D.90808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091012233854.GA29446@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <89c4f90c0910150806g49c64037re550b478a7cf85e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091018235910.GA30045@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091019011710.GP9464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:17:10PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >  
> > +   if (xfs_iflags_test(ip, XFS_INEW | XFS_IRECLAIMABLE | XFS_IRECLAIM)) {
> > +           read_unlock(&pag->pag_ici_lock);
> > +           return ENOENT;
> > +   }
> 
> This needs an IRELE(ip) here, doesn't it?

No, the check is before the igrab now.  That was kinda the point as I
suspect that the igrab might be corrupting state of a reclaimable or
in reclaim inode.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>