From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262084AbVD1HeQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:34:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262081AbVD1HeP (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:34:15 -0400 Received: from [213.170.72.194] ([213.170.72.194]:16601 "EHLO shelob.oktetlabs.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262016AbVD1HcK (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:32:10 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without clear_inode() call between From: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org In-Reply-To: References: <1114607741.12617.4.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> <1114618748.12617.23.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: MTD Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:32:08 +0400 Message-Id: <1114673528.3483.2.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Why do you need to move it from prune_icache() to dispose_list()? > For the hash list it's the right thing, but for sb_list it's not > needed, is it? Yes, it is not needed but harmless. I did it only because i_hash & i_sb_list insertions/deletions always come in couple. So I decided move them both, to be more consistent, to make code less complicated. If you regard this hazardous I might split these removals. But IMHO, my variant is a bit more pleasant. > Retest, and resend. Thanks. I assume I don't need to notify Andrew about the inconsistency in the old patch, or should I? -- Best Regards, Artem B. Bityuckiy, St.-Petersburg, Russia.