| To: | Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs: fix locking for inode cache radix tree tag updates |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 2 Mar 2010 10:31:41 +0100 |
| Cc: | hch@xxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <201003020106.o2216gkU004242@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <201003020106.o2216gkU004242@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 07:06:42PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote: > As I understand it, the point here is that the tags associated > with a value stored in a radix tree are just as much "content" > as the value itself. Therefore you need to use the same locking > protocol. So we need to get the write lock to modify a tag value. Yes. > This succeeds at getting xfs_reclaim_inode() to skip over > this one. I think it's overloading the flag though--at least > the name of the flag (which maybe is ambiguous anyway) doesn't > really reflect what's happening here. (The result is correct, > however.) We're kind of reclaiming the inode - just instead of freeing it we're immediately reusing it. We used the XFS_IRECLAIM flag the same way before we started redoing the iget code. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfs: fix locking for inode cache radix tree tag updates, Alex Elder |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Stalled xfs_repair on 100TB filesystem, Jason Vagalatos |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfs: fix locking for inode cache radix tree tag updates, Alex Elder |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Proposed patch for xfsprogs, C Linus Hicks |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |