Re: [RFC][PATCH] ext2: Resolve i_nlink race in ext2_rename

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

 



Hi,

2011/2/24 Josh Hunt <johunt@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Jan
>
> I'm not seeing the problem with your patch as was expected since we're
> not messing with i_nlink anymore. Al suggested marking the inode as
> dirty where we were previously doing the old_inode dec. I believe this
> is needed as well since we are updating it's ctime. I've attached a
> version marking the inode dirty and it also fixes the comment making
> reference to calling inode_dec_link_count().
>
> I'm not completely clear on the historical reasons for messing with the
> link count of old_inode in the first place. It was just to simulate the
> linking and unlinking of the old_inode?
>
> Thanks
> Josh
>

can we share your test/benchmark? I'd like to add it to my test suite
as no-regression test.

Marco
--
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


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