On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 01:49:23PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 09:30:47PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > * inode->i_lock is *always* the innermost lock. > > > * > > > + * inode->i_lock is *always* the innermost lock. > > > + * > > > > No need to repeat, we got it.. > > Except that I didn't see where you fixed all the places where it is > *not* the innermost lock. Like for example places that take dcache_lock > inside i_lock. I can't find any code outside of ceph where the dcache_lock is used within 200 lines of code of the inode->i_lock. The ceph code is not nesting them, though. And AFAICT, the i_lock is not used at all in the dentry code. So I must be missing something if this is occurring - can you point out where this lock ordering is occurring in the mainline code? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
