Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Adding\s+attr\,\s+inode\s+reference\s+query\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:04:32 +1100
I'm doing a bit of debugging with attr creation in xfs_repair which uses libxfs which has it's own simple cache/ref counting/transaction mechanism for inodes and buffers. I came across a refcounting
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00051.html (8,516 bytes)

2. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:45:12 +1100
Yeah, it looks wrong to me too. doucette |1.153| | ASSERT(ip->i_d.di_anextents == 0); doucette |1.148| | VN_HOLD(XFS_ITOV(ip)); doucette |1.146| | xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); doucette |1
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00052.html (10,265 bytes)

3. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:54:10 +1100
The difference between the two is kinda subtle. IHOLD() increments the reference count to ensure the transaction commit doesn't drop the last reference to the inode when it unlocks it and hence cause
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00053.html (10,389 bytes)

4. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:23:02 +1100
Oh okay. Want a reference held in both cases, but don't always want it locked after commit. One way, we take an extra reference and then drop it at commit, the other we just don't drop the reference
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00054.html (9,708 bytes)

5. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:30:06 +1100
This sounds like a very implicit way of doing things IMHO (i.e. not clear from the hold that it is about a reference being dropped at commit time). It almost seems like a different kind of trans-ihol
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00055.html (10,292 bytes)

6. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:51:23 +1100
Go look in fs/xfs/xfs_vnodeops.c - every IHOLD is called during a transaction there is a different reason given, but they all boil down to one thing - ensuring the transaction commit doesn't drop the
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00056.html (11,039 bytes)

7. xtent list corruption in xfs_iext_irec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:04:32 +1100
I'm doing a bit of debugging with attr creation in xfs_repair which uses libxfs which has it's own simple cache/ref counting/transaction mechanism for inodes and buffers. I came across a refcounting
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00871.html (8,332 bytes)

8. rec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: ok" <bnaujok@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:45:12 +1100
Yeah, it looks wrong to me too. doucette |1.153| | ASSERT(ip->i_d.di_anextents == 0); doucette |1.148| | VN_HOLD(XFS_ITOV(ip)); doucette |1.146| | xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); doucette |1
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00872.html (10,085 bytes)

9. 7159 - Fix extent list corruption in xfs_iext_irec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:54:10 +1100
The difference between the two is kinda subtle. IHOLD() increments the reference count to ensure the transaction commit doesn't drop the last reference to the inode when it unlocks it and hence cause
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00873.html (10,209 bytes)

10. s_iext_irec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:23:02 +1100
Oh okay. Want a reference held in both cases, but don't always want it locked after commit. One way, we take an extra reference and then drop it at commit, the other we just don't drop the reference
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00874.html (9,528 bytes)

11. TAKE 987159 - Fix extent list corruption in xfs_iext_irec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:30:06 +1100
This sounds like a very implicit way of doing things IMHO (i.e. not clear from the hold that it is about a reference being dropped at commit time). It almost seems like a different kind of trans-ihol
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00875.html (10,112 bytes)

12. on in xfs_iext_irec_compact_full(). (score: 1)
Author: Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:51:23 +1100
Go look in fs/xfs/xfs_vnodeops.c - every IHOLD is called during a transaction there is a different reason given, but they all boil down to one thing - ensuring the transaction commit doesn't drop the
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00876.html (10,821 bytes)

13. Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: "Barry Naujok" <bnaujok@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:04:32 +1100
I'm doing a bit of debugging with attr creation in xfs_repair which uses libxfs which has it's own simple cache/ref counting/transaction mechanism for inodes and buffers. I came across a refcounting
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01689.html (8,155 bytes)

14. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 11:45:12 +1100
Yeah, it looks wrong to me too. doucette |1.153| | ASSERT(ip->i_d.di_anextents == 0); doucette |1.148| | VN_HOLD(XFS_ITOV(ip)); doucette |1.146| | xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); doucette |1
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01690.html (10,135 bytes)

15. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:54:10 +1100
The difference between the two is kinda subtle. IHOLD() increments the reference count to ensure the transaction commit doesn't drop the last reference to the inode when it unlocks it and hence cause
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01691.html (10,259 bytes)

16. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:23:02 +1100
Oh okay. Want a reference held in both cases, but don't always want it locked after commit. One way, we take an extra reference and then drop it at commit, the other we just don't drop the reference
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01692.html (9,669 bytes)

17. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:30:06 +1100
This sounds like a very implicit way of doing things IMHO (i.e. not clear from the hold that it is about a reference being dropped at commit time). It almost seems like a different kind of trans-ihol
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01693.html (10,243 bytes)

18. Re: Adding attr, inode reference query (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:51:23 +1100
Go look in fs/xfs/xfs_vnodeops.c - every IHOLD is called during a transaction there is a different reason given, but they all boil down to one thing - ensuring the transaction commit doesn't drop the
/archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01694.html (10,976 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu