search for: inode_lock

...root *root = BTRFS_I(inode)->root; struct btrfs_inode *entry; - struct rb_node **p = &root->inode_tree.rb_node; - struct rb_node *parent = NULL; + struct rb_node **p; + struct rb_node *parent; + +again: + p = &root->inode_tree.rb_node; + parent = NULL; spin_lock(&root->inode_lock); while (*p) { @@ -3108,13 +3112,16 @@ static void inode_tree_add(struct inode *inode) entry = rb_entry(parent, struct btrfs_inode, rb_node); if (inode->i_ino < entry->vfs_inode.i_ino) - p = &(*p)->rb_left; + p = &parent->rb_left; else if (inode->i_ino &gt...

Currently, default behavior of O_DIRECT writes was allowing concurrent writing among nodes, no cluster coherency guaranteed (no EX locks was taken), it hurts buffered reads on other nodes by reading stale data from cache. The new mount option introduce a chance to choose two different behaviors for O_DIRECT writes: * coherency=full, as the default value, will disallow concurrent

...because it is in use on other nodes The scenario which I think is happening is as follows: node1 node2 rmdir("d"); ocfs2_remote_dentry_delete() ocfs2_dentry_convert_worker() finishes ocfs2_unlink() eventually enters ocfs2_delete_inode() ocfs2_inode_lock() ocfs2_query_inode_wipe() -> fail ocfs2_inode_unlock() ocfs2_dentry_post_unlock() ocfs2_drop_dentry_lock() iput() ocfs2_delete_inode() ocfs2_inode_lock() ocfs2_query_inode_wipe() -> fail ocfs2_inode_unlock() clear_inode() cl...

Hi, Since upgrading to "2.6.18-194" I am getting odd messages in the logs. Such as; sraid3 kernel INFO task pdflush 259 blocked for more than 120 seconds. The output from > grep '120 seconds' /var/log/messages | tr : ' ' | awk '{print $10}' | sort | uniq -c 6 nfsd 4 pdflush This is from an NFS server that since the upgrade has been

...eded by knfsd. */ -void write_inode_now(struct inode *inode, int sync) +int write_inode_now(struct inode *inode, int sync) { + int err = 0; struct writeback_control wbc = { .nr_to_write = LONG_MAX, .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_ALL, @@ -569,10 +570,11 @@ might_sleep(); spin_lock(&inode_lock); - __writeback_single_inode(inode, &wbc); + err = __writeback_single_inode(inode, &wbc); spin_unlock(&inode_lock); if (sync) wait_on_inode(inode); + return err; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(write_inode_now); @@ -641,8 +643,11 @@ need_write_inode_now = 1; spin_unlock(&inode...

...stem. 3. invalidate_inodes. In shrink_dcache_for_umount, we will drop the dentry, and queue ocfs2_wq for dentry lock put. While in invalidate_inodes we will call invalidate_list which will iterate all the inodes for the sb. The bad thing is that in this function it will call cond_resched_lock(&inode_lock). So if in any case, we are scheduled out and ocfs2_wq is scheduled and drop some inodes, the "next" in invalidate_list will get damaged(have next->next = next). And the invalidate_list will enter dead loop and cause very high cpu. So the only chance that we can solve this problem is...

...root(u32 nodesize, u32 leafsize, u32 sectorsize, INIT_LIST_HEAD(&root->dirty_list); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&root->orphan_list); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&root->root_list); - spin_lock_init(&root->node_lock); spin_lock_init(&root->orphan_lock); spin_lock_init(&root->inode_lock); spin_lock_init(&root->accounting_lock); -- 1.7.4.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

...uncate(inode, i_size_read(inode)); ret = written; goto out_dio; } diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/journal.c b/fs/ocfs2/journal.c index a20a0f1..1337ea6 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/journal.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/journal.c @@ -805,14 +805,14 @@ int ocfs2_journal_init(struct ocfs2_journal *journal, int *dirty) inode_lock = 1; di = (struct ocfs2_dinode *)bh->b_data; - if (inode->i_size < OCFS2_MIN_JOURNAL_SIZE) { + if (i_size_read(inode) < OCFS2_MIN_JOURNAL_SIZE) { mlog(ML_ERROR, "Journal file size (%lld) is too small!\n", - inode->i_size); + i_size_read(inode)); stat...

After running ceph on XFS for some time, I decided to try btrfs again. Performance with the current "for-linux-min" branch and big metadata is much better. The only problem (?) I''m still seeing is a warning that seems to occur from time to time: [87703.784552] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [87703.789759] WARNING: at fs/btrfs/inode.c:2103

Hi all - Here''s my current error handling patchset, against 3.1-rc8. Almost all of this patchset is preparing for actual error handling. Before we start in on that work, I''m trying to reduce the surface we need to worry about. It turns out that there is a ton of code that returns an error code but never actually reports an error. The patchset has grown to 65 patches. 46 of them