Re: [PATCH 2/9] writeback: switch to per-bdi threads for flushingdata

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 06:35:32PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>   Jens, sorry about bitching about this again but you're silently changing
> substantial locking assumptions without writing it *anywhere* and without
> arguing it's safe.
>   Originally, generic_sync_sb_inodes() from writeback path have been
> called with
> a) s_umount_sem held
> b) sb->s_count elevated
>   The second still seems to be true since, if I'm right, we pass here
> non-NULL sb only from sync_filesystem() and that takes care of the
> superblock reference. So that is just a matter of documenting this fact
> before the function.

We'll defintively need to keep both to prevent races vs unmount.  And
with a NULL superblock passed I'm not even sure how we can take care of
it.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/