On Tue, 1 November 2011 14:10:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the logfs tree got a conflict in
> fs/logfs/file.c between commit 02c24a82187d ("fs: push i_mutex and
> filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers") from Linus' tree
> and commit 39da12ef4bbe ("logfs: take write mutex lock during fsync and
> sync") from the logfs tree.
>
> I have no idea what needs to be done here. I fixed it like below to make
> it build, but a better fix is needed.
>From a code perspective your fix below is correct, to the best of my
judgement. I'm less sure what to do from a git perspective.
Explicitly tell Linus about it in the logfs pull request?
> diff --cc fs/logfs/file.c
> index b548c87,f85d603..0000000
> --- a/fs/logfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/logfs/file.c
> @@@ -219,20 -219,13 +219,22 @@@ long logfs_ioctl(struct file *file, uns
> }
> }
>
> -int logfs_fsync(struct file *file, int datasync)
> +int logfs_fsync(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
> {
> struct super_block *sb = file->f_mapping->host->i_sb;
> + struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = filemap_write_and_wait_range(inode->i_mapping, start, end);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
>
> + mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
> + logfs_get_wblocks(sb, NULL, WF_LOCK);
> logfs_write_anchor(sb);
> + logfs_put_wblocks(sb, NULL, WF_LOCK);
> + mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
Jörn
--
You can take my soul, but not my lack of enthusiasm.
-- Wally
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
