I mean busy inodes after umount doing bogus write_inode_now. Busy inodes
don't pin the superblock (vfsmnt does but it's gone, otherwise we
wouldn't be in kill_sb in the first place).
Dave Peterson's fix solves the double free issue, but does potentially
introduce another busy inode after sb has gone.
>On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 01:51:42AM +0300, Mika Penttilä wrote:
>>That piece of code looks wrong in other ways also..if we have unmounted
>>an active fs (which shouldn't be done but happens!) we shouldn't be at
>>least writing back to it anything! The !sb test isn't useful (we never
>>clear it in live inodes) and MS_ACTIVE handling is racy as hell wrt
>Would you mind actually _reading_ kill_super() and stuff called by it?
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to email@example.com
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 22:00:33 EST