On 27.07.2012, at 21:57, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:48:39 -0500 > Steve French <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Presumably to address the cifs equivalent of NFS bug (drop_nlink warning): >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822703 >> >> your patch which wraps drop_nlink in i_lock spinlock (as Jeff noted >> addresses only part of the problem) >> http://git.altlinux.org/people/piastry/public/cifs-2.6.git?p=cifs-2.6.git;a=patch;h=df2d6b1fbf2401c5ee04f2ac143ea0954e3a87a6 >> >> shouldn't it also wrap the three places in fs/cifs/inode.c which do >> set_nlink? >> > > It might not hurt to serialize all inode attribute updates under the > i_lock. If two updates are racing and the CPU ends up reording things, > you could end up with an inode that has a mix of attrs returned by > calls. The NFS client did this quite some time ago... > > -- > Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
Ok. I agree with your points. Since I am on vacations now I suggest to drop this patch from the series - I will respin it further. So, let's not stop on this one.-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
