On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 09:02:16AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 11:16:02PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > > > Essentially, the minimal variant of ->evict_inode(). It's > > a trimmed-down clear_inode(), sans any fs callbacks. Once > > it returns we know that no async writeback will be happening; > > every ->evict_inode() instance should do that once and do that > > before doing anything ->write_inode() could interfere with > > (e.g. freeing the on-disk inode). > > Naming seems a bit unfortunate - this really sounds like something > in page writeback. In fact I'd almost bet we had a function with > that name there in the past. > > Care to slap an inode_ prefix on it? Ehh... I'd been tempted to call it end_async or something like that. I'm not particulary fond of the name; any better suggestions are welcome. The point of what's being done in that function is that it acts as a barrier; "wait for async activity to run down; new one won't be started since it's already marked I_FREEING". -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
