On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 01:42:06PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 09:54:30AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > The only non-constant value read under m_sb_lock in xfs_fs_statfs is > > sb_dblocks, and it could become stale right after dropping the lock > > anyway. Remove the thus pointless lock section. > > Is there a stronger reason later for removing the critical section? > Do we lose much by leaving the protection in place? It makes a completely mess of xfs_fs_statfs, and as stated in the commit message about it's not actually useful at all. I also don't think taking a global lock from a non-privileged operation is an old that good idea to start with if we can avoid it.
