Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753228Ab3IJXx4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:53:56 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:59425 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751402Ab3IJXxy (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:53:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 00:53:49 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Chinner , Glauber Costa Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20130910235349.GG13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20130910143807.4c32d548e08d2184061f52cb@canb.auug.org.au> <20130910152753.662599171456233c5f91edb4@linux-foundation.org> <20130910222924.GB13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20130910153520.14e49cd32feb16d45eb8abac@linux-foundation.org> <20130910223624.GC13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20130910154116.cc4afe048213a779040ea3cc@linux-foundation.org> <20130910224823.GE13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20130910225934.GF13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1235 Lines: 26 On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 04:37:19PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > It's not that bad, actually; I think the variant I've pushed right now > > (vfs.git#for-next, head at f5e1dd34561e0fb06400b378d595198918833021) should > > be doing the right thing. It ought to cover everything in your branch > > in -next from "fs: bump inode and dentry counters to long" on to the > > end of queue. > > >From a quick look, this looks pretty broken: > > if (list_lru_add(&dentry->d_sb->s_dentry_lru, &dentry->d_lru)) > this_cpu_inc(nr_dentry_unused); > dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_LRU_LIST; > > because if that list_lru_add() can fail, then we shouldn't set the > DCACHE_LRU_LIST bit either. list_lru_add() can fail if it's already on the list; leaving the counter alone should've been conditional on that, setting the flag - no. Said that, it probably should be WARN_ON(!...); this_cpu_inc(); ... |= ...; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/