On 6/11/13 3:59 AM, Maxim Patlasov wrote:
- if (mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE) {
+ if (lock_inode)
mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
+ if (mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE)
fuse_set_nowrite(inode);
- }
Just for clarity, can you make the condition to check
FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE and call to fuse_set_nowrite() nested within the
larger if (lock_inode) { .. } block? fuse_set_nowrite() should not be
called without i_mutex acquired. The current style of calling
mutex_lock() and fuse_set_nowrite() in separate conditions can
potentially cause bugs in the future if they were to get re-ordered due
to some unrelated patch. Nesting them makes the relation more explicit
and clear.
Thanks,
Avati
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
