From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265893AbUGIVut (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2004 17:50:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265920AbUGIVut (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2004 17:50:49 -0400 Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:54961 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265893AbUGIVur (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2004 17:50:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 22:50:46 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Modular filesystem using drop_inode would need inode_lock Message-ID: <20040709215046.GA6681@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , "Luck, Tony" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 02:43:32PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > This is mostly a logical inconsistency at the moment (since the > only filesystem that has a "drop_inode" function defined in its > super_operations is hugetlbfs, and it is unlikely to move out of > the kernel and into a module). But the ->drop_inode() function > is called with inode_lock held, and it is expected to drop the > lock ... which would be impossible for a module as the lock is > not exported. ->drop_inode is a bad idea anyway. Please send a pointer to your filesystem so we can fix it.