It just occurred to me: If i_version is 64bit, then knfsd would need to be careful when reading it on a 32bit host. What are the locking rules? Presumably it is only updated under i_mutex protection, but having to get i_mutex to read it would seem a little heavy handed. Should it use a seqlock like i_size? Could we use the same seqlock that i_size uses, or would we need a separate one? NeilBrown - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Dave Kleikamp <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- References:
- [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
- [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- Prev by Date: Re: Sysfs and suicidal attributes
- Next by Date: Re: [patch 10/10] *Tests* Scheduler profiling - Use immediate values
- Previous by thread: Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- Next by thread: Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- Index(es):
 |