On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 18:18 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Using yield() to wait for a precisely defined event (clear_inode() > finishing) doesn't seem like a very good idea. Especially, since > Artem's patch will probably make it trigger more often. Agreed. Even before Artem's patch, we're still effectively busy-waiting for something which calls back into the file system's clear_inode method and may well sleep and perform I/O. > How about this (totally untested) patch? Even if I_LOCK is not set > initially, wake_up_inode() should do the right thing and wake up the > waiting task after clear_inode(). It shouldn't cause spurious > wakeups, since there should be no other reference to the inode. Since Artem introduced a wake_up_inode() in dispose_list(), your patch seems reasonable. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Priority Lists for the RT mutex
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.12-rc3 fails to read partition table
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between
- Index(es):