Hi Jaegeuk, > -----Original Message----- > From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2015 1:16 PM > To: Chao Yu > Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 12/12] f2fs: use extent_cache by default [snip] > > > @@ -237,10 +237,11 @@ void update_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *node_page) > > > ri->i_size = cpu_to_le64(i_size_read(inode)); > > > ri->i_blocks = cpu_to_le64(inode->i_blocks); > > > > > > - read_lock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock); > > > - set_raw_extent(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext, &ri->i_ext); > > > - read_unlock(&F2FS_I(inode)->ext_lock); > > > - > > > + if (F2FS_I(inode)->extent_tree) > > > > Could extent cache destroy after above check? > > I don't think so. > > The extent_tree is assigned as one way. > Once it is assigned, it will be deallocated only after evict_inode. Previously, I suspected that ->write_inode and ->evict will be executed concurrently. After checking the code, I find that would not happen, so we are safe. Thanks, > > Thanks, > > > > > Thanks, -- 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
