On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 09:24:31PM -0800, 'Ira Weiny' wrote: > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx> > > xfs_reinit_inode() -> inode_init_always() already handles calling > init_rwsem(i_rwsem). Doing so again is unneeded. > > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx> Ok... I'm going to blame exchange... Dan just pointed out that I mist this response from Dave... Saying this patch was wrong. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200221012625.GT10776@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Sorry, I need to read that email and look at it. Ira > > --- > New for V4: > > NOTE: This was found while ensuring the new i_aops_sem was properly > handled. It seems like this is a layering violation so I think it is > worth cleaning up so as to not confuse others. > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > index 8dc2e5414276..836a1f09be03 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c > @@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ xfs_iget_cache_hit( > spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock); > rcu_read_unlock(); > > + ASSERT(!rwsem_is_locked(&inode->i_rwsem)); > error = xfs_reinit_inode(mp, inode); > if (error) { > bool wake; > @@ -452,9 +453,6 @@ xfs_iget_cache_hit( > ip->i_sick = 0; > ip->i_checked = 0; > > - ASSERT(!rwsem_is_locked(&inode->i_rwsem)); > - init_rwsem(&inode->i_rwsem); > - > spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock); > spin_unlock(&pag->pag_ici_lock); > } else { > -- > 2.21.0 >
