Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 15:41:45 +0200
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20230817-tortur-wallung-3512b32d8dd5@brauner>

> Thanks for that question! I was missing something. Before these changes,
> when a superblock was unmounted and it hit deactivate_super() it could do:
> 
> P1                                                      P2
> deactivate_locked_super()                               grab_super()

s/deactivate_locked_super()/deactivate_super()

References:
- [PATCH 0/3] super: allow waiting without s_umount held
  - From: Christian Brauner
- [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
  - From: Christian Brauner
- Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
  - From: Jan Kara
- Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
  - From: Christian Brauner

Prev by Date: [syzbot] [ext4?] memory leak in __es_insert_extent
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] fs/affs: Rename local toupper() to fn() to avoid confusion
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2/3] super: wait for nascent superblocks
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [NTFS 3] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [NTFS 3] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux