Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190418161024.GG7751@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20190418161024.GG7751@bombadil.infradead.org> <155559635133.21702.4737487773869377967.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <155559636704.21702.4538723150377303298.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     dhowells@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>, coda@cs.cmu.edu,
        codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] vfs, coda: Fix the lack of locking in FID replacement inode rehashing
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2285.1555603933.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 17:12:13 +0100
Message-ID: <2286.1555603933@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> Don't you also need to delete the remove_inode_hash() and
> __insert_inode_hash() calls?

Yep.  Good point.

David