On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> I can confirm that your patch fixes the original panic/BUG() with both
> Brian's test-case and the GlusterFS regression tests.
>
> Feel free to add my Tested-by/Reviewed-by signoff for this patch.
Thanks for the review and testing, patches
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:14:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
> > NULL inode is valid, no?
>
> It is valid, yes. It's called a "negative" dentry, which
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 06:14:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
NULL inode is valid, no?
It is valid, yes. It's called a negative dentry, which caches the
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Niels de Vos nde...@redhat.com wrote:
I can confirm that your patch fixes the original panic/BUG() with both
Brian's test-case and the GlusterFS regression tests.
Feel free to add my Tested-by/Reviewed-by signoff for this patch.
Thanks for the review and
On 07/16/2013 12:14 PM, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
>> NULL inode is valid, no?
>
> It is valid, yes. It's called a "negative" dentry, which caches the
>
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
> NULL inode is valid, no?
It is valid, yes. It's called a "negative" dentry, which caches the information
that the file does not exist.
> I think the question
On 07/16/2013 06:39 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:08:22PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
>> On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
...
>
>>> ---
>>> fs/fuse/dir.c |4 +++-
>>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/fuse/dir.c
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:08:22PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
> > not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
> > shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
> >
>
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:08:22PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
BUG:
On 07/16/2013 06:39 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:08:22PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
...
---
fs/fuse/dir.c |4 +++-
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fuse/dir.c b/fs/fuse/dir.c
index
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
NULL inode is valid, no?
It is valid, yes. It's called a negative dentry, which caches the information
that the file does not exist.
I think the question is
On 07/16/2013 12:14 PM, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:15:16AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
I'm not sure why it would need to have a valid inode. A dentry with a
NULL inode is valid, no?
It is valid, yes. It's called a negative dentry, which caches the
information
that
On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
> not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
> shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
>
> BUG: Dentry ...{i=0,n=...} still in use (1) [unmount of fuse fuse]
>
In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
BUG: Dentry ...{i=0,n=...} still in use (1) [unmount of fuse fuse]
Reported-by: Justin Clift
Signed-off-by: Niels de Vos
In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
BUG: Dentry ...{i=0,n=...} still in use (1) [unmount of fuse fuse]
Reported-by: Justin Clift jcl...@redhat.com
On 07/15/2013 08:59 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
In case d_lookup() returns a dentry with d_inode == NULL, the dentry is
not returned with dput(). This results in triggering a BUG() in
shrink_dcache_for_umount_subtree():
BUG: Dentry ...{i=0,n=...} still in use (1) [unmount of fuse fuse]
16 matches
Mail list logo
