xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] XFS: Don't flush stale inodes

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] XFS: Don't flush stale inodes
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 23:14:44 +1100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20100102120053.GB18502@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1262399980-19277-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100102120053.GB18502@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 07:00:53AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 01:39:40PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Because inodes remain in cache much longer than inode buffers do
> > under memory pressure, we can get the situation where we have stale,
> > dirty inodes being reclaimed but the backing storage has been freed.
> > Hence we should never, ever flush XFS_ISTALE inodes to disk as
> > there is no guarantee that the backing buffer is in cache and
> > still marked stale when the flush occurs.
> 
> We should not flush stale inodes.  But how do we even end up calling
> xfs_iflush with a stale inode?

xfs_reclaim_inode() -> xfs_iflush() according to the stack traces
that found bad inode magic numbers in xfs_itobp().

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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