On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 2:40 AM, <piastryyy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27.07.2012, at 21:57, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:48:39 -0500 >> Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> 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 <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
