On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 2:40 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 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.

It created a series of merge conflicts to drop this, it may be easier
for me to do something similar to what Jeff suggested in a followon
patch on top of it.

-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
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

Reply via email to