From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 04:11:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 04:10:53 -0400 Received: from mons.uio.no ([129.240.130.14]:30105 "EHLO mons.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 04:10:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <15124.43767.470515.182286@charged.uio.no> Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:10:31 +0200 To: Alexander Viro Cc: Gergely Tamas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: OOPS with 2.4.5 [kernel BUG at inode.c:486] In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 6.89 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no From: Trond Myklebust User-Agent: SEMI/1.13.7 (Awazu) CLIME/1.13.6 (=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQ2YbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJU4+MRsoQg==?=) MULE XEmacs/21.1 (patch 14) (Cuyahoga Valley) (i386-redhat-linux) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>> " " == Alexander Viro writes: > On 30 May 2001, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> Al: Is there any reason why the cases >> >> if (!inode->i_nlink) >> >> and the 'magic nfs path' should be treated differently? >> Personally, I'd rather prefer to merge the 2. > I don't think that it's a good idea. Why not fry the cache > explicitly when you invalidate the inode? Won't there be a race there? Imagine if some other process is busy writing to that inode, and happens to add a new page after we've truncated... Cheers, Trond