On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 10:39:28PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 14:17 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > and that changelog doesn't really explain it either ("fix leak"? Ok, I can
> > see the iput() fixing the leak - but you also did that jffs2_clear_inode()
> > change, and that has no explanation what-so-ever.
>
> jffs2_clear_inode() is the file system's ->clear_inode method, so it
> gets called from the VFS when the inode is destroyed, after iput().
>
> I suppose that ought to have been a clue, right from the very beginning,
> that we should never have been calling it directly on our error paths.
Yep. The other place that directly called its ->clear_inode() also had
been bogus, BTW - logfs had been playing rather sick games with special
inodes and ended up open-coding just about everything on new_inode/iput
paths for those. They needed that stuff evicted after all normal inodes,
but before the second call of invalidate_inodes() would scream about
surviving busy inodes. I.e. that should've been happening in ->put_super();
no need to deal with handcrafted inodes that would sit outside of inode
list...
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
