On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 06:34:25PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <r...@sisk.pl> wrote: > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16334 > > Subject : reiserfs locking (v2) > > Submitter : Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com> > > Date : 2010-07-02 9:34 (7 days old) > > Message-ID : <20100702093451.ga3...@swordfish.minsk.epam.com> > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127806306303590&w=2 > > Frederic? Al? I assume this is some late fallout from the BKL removal > ages ago.. It's the old filldir-vs-mmap crud, but normally it should > be impossible to trigger because the inode for a directory should > never be mmap'able, so we should never have the same i_mutex lock used > for both mmap and for filldir protection. > > We saw some of that oddity long ago, I wonder if it's lockdep being > confused about some inodes.
I think it has been there from the beginning. At least it was there before the reiserfs bkl removal in .32. Indeed the readdir <-> unmap/release inversion problem can not happen. But Al said that can happen between write and release. (Although I don't see where write takes the inode mutex). He also highlighted the fact that reiserfs refcounting based on i_count was totally broken. He has a fix the whole in the vfs tree, in the for-next branch on commit 6c2bdaf089a3876226893fab00dd83596c465ad2 "Fix reiserfs_file_release()" No more uses of the i_mutex on release after that, nor i_count, but a private openers refcount and a tailpack mutex per reiserfs inode. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
