On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 07:18:51AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Seems like it would work, but it seems fragile to me - I'm > wondering how we can ensure that the private shrink list > manipulations can be kept private. > > We have a similar situation with the inode cache (private shrink > list) but the I_FREEING flag is set the entire time the inode is on > the shrink list. Any new hash lookup or attempt to grab the inode > that occurs while I_FREEING is set fails, so perhaps dentries also > need a well defined "being torn down and freed" state where new > references cannot be taken even though the dentry can still be > found... Ummm... You mean, have d_lookup() et.al. fail on something that is on a shrink list? -- 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
