| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim |
| From: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:40:48 +1100 |
| Cc: | Patrick Schreurs <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tommy van Leeuwen <tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bas Couwenberg <bas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS List <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20091019035426.GB18296@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20090930124104.GA7463@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AC60D27.9060703@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091005214348.GA15448@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4ACB080D.3010708@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091007011926.GB32032@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AD18C8D.90808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091012233854.GA29446@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091019011600.GO9464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091019035426.GB18296@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:54:26PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:16:00PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > + * The hash lock here protects a thread in xfs_iget from racing with > > > + * us on recycling the inode. Once we have the XFS_IRECLAIM flag set > > > + * it will not touch it. > > > */ > > > - write_lock(&pag->pag_ici_lock); > > > > Did you mean to remove this write_lock? The patch does not remove > > the unlocks.... > > It's taken by the caller. Ah, I guess I need to see the whole patch series, then. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 2.6.31+2.6.31.4: XFS - All I/O locks up to D-state after 24-48 hours (sysrq-t+w available), Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | xfs_fsr: XFS_IOC_SWAPEXT failed : busy?m, Linda A. Walsh |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 2.6.31 xfs_fs_destroy_inode: cannot reclaim, Tommy van Leeuwen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |