diff options
author | Eric Sandeen | 2009-03-05 00:38:18 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Theodore Ts'o | 2009-03-05 00:38:18 +0100 |
commit | 7ce9d5d1f3c8736511daa413c64985a05b2feee3 (patch) | |
tree | 89b30c50d6e09467f43f4f824d04838e9bb33026 /fs/mbcache.c | |
parent | Linux 2.6.29-rc7 (diff) | |
download | kernel-qcow2-linux-7ce9d5d1f3c8736511daa413c64985a05b2feee3.tar.gz kernel-qcow2-linux-7ce9d5d1f3c8736511daa413c64985a05b2feee3.tar.xz kernel-qcow2-linux-7ce9d5d1f3c8736511daa413c64985a05b2feee3.zip |
ext4: fix ext4_free_inode() vs. ext4_claim_inode() race
I was seeing fsck errors on inode bitmaps after a 4 thread
dbench run on a 4 cpu machine:
Inode bitmap differences: -50736 -(50752--50753) etc...
I believe that this is because ext4_free_inode() uses atomic
bitops, and although ext4_new_inode() *used* to also use atomic
bitops for synchronization, commit
393418676a7602e1d7d3f6e560159c65c8cbd50e changed this to use
the sb_bgl_lock, so that we could also synchronize against
read_inode_bitmap and initialization of uninit inode tables.
However, that change left ext4_free_inode using atomic bitops,
which I think leaves no synchronization between setting &
unsetting bits in the inode table.
The below patch fixes it for me, although I wonder if we're
getting at all heavy-handed with this spinlock...
Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs/mbcache.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions