On 08/05/2015 04:11 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
On Thu, 2015-07-30 at 13:48 +0800, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
In ubifs, we have to do a budget for inode before marking
it as dirty. But sometimes, we would call dirty_inode in vfs
which will not do a budget for inode. In this case, we have
to do a budget in ubifs_dirty_inode() by ourselvies.
Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Could you please explain some more the problem you are trying to solve.
Locking looks confusing and broken. It looks like what you are
expressing is that the 'ui_mutex' is optional, and this smells fishy.
Oh, yes, that's TRUE. This patch makes the locking broken. I am sorry
about it.
[...]
Please, try to explain what you want to achieve some more. I am not
sure I understand the end goal.
Okey, what I want here is to doing a budget for the inode in
.dirty_inode called by vfs. Currently, the all work is under the full
control of ubifs as the comment of @ui_mutex said. But the
dquot_disable() is doing a dirty_inode() without asking ubifs is that
allowed. So I want to do the budget in ubifs_dirty_inode() itself here.
But, that's INCORRECT. Yes, my bad. Thanx for your comment.
And I found another solution for it. To introduce a callback in quota
to allow filesystem to dirty inode in dquot_disable(). I believe that
works.
Anyway, I agree that this patch is a fishy one here. I will drop it
in next version and send a better solution for it. Of course, with
some more description for what I am doing. :)
Thanx a lot, Richard and Atem
Yang
Artem.
.
--
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
