On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 06:18:57PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 02:32:03PM -0700, Joel Becker wrote:
> > Are we guaranteed that all allocation changes are locked out by
> > i_dio_count>0? I don't think we are. The ocfs2 code very strongly
> > assumes the state of a file's allocation when it holds i_alloc_sem. I
> > feel like we lose that here.
>
> You aren't, neither with the old i_alloc_sem code, nor with the 1:1
> replacement using i_dio_count.
>
> Do a quick grep who gets i_alloc_sem exclusively (down_write): it's
> really just the truncate code, and it's cut & paste duplicates in ntfs
> and reiserfs.
Sorry, I confused this with our ip_alloc_sem. I was tired.
Joel
--
Life's Little Instruction Book #24
"Drink champagne for no reason at all."
http://www.jlbec.org/
jl...@evilplan.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
