Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I think you're better off fixing this problem like I did for the
> allocation side, that is:
> - remove the xfs_ilock and xfs_trans_ijoin (or probably still
> xfs_trans_iget in your version) from xfs_rtfree_extent, and
> instead add asserts that the inode is locked and has an inode_item
> attach to it.
> - in xfs_bunmapi if we are dealing with an inode with the rt flag
> bump the reference count on the inode there and attach it to the
> transaction before calling into xfs_bmap_del_extent, similar to
> what we do in xfs_bmap_rtalloc.
I will make the change and test and send the new version of the patch.
BTW when you say reference counting the inode do you mean I should call
View this message in context:
Sent from the Xfs - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.