To: dedekind@infradead.org
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
       linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
In-reply-to: <1114673528.3483.2.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru>
	(dedekind@infradead.org)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFS bugfix: two read_inode() calles without
	clear_inode() call between
References: <1114607741.12617.4.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru>
	 <E1DQoui-0002In-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
	 <1114618748.12617.23.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru>
	 <E1DQqZu-0002Rf-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <1114673528.3483.2.camel@sauron.oktetlabs.ru>
Message-Id: <E1DR3ei-0005OC-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:41:52 +0200
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1067
Lines: 23

> > Why do you need to move it from prune_icache() to dispose_list()?
> > For the hash list it's the right thing, but for sb_list it's not
> > needed, is it?
> Yes, it is not needed but harmless. I did it only because i_hash &
> i_sb_list insertions/deletions always come in couple. So I decided move
> them both, to be more consistent, to make code less complicated.
> 
> If you regard this hazardous I might split these removals. But IMHO, my
> variant is a bit more pleasant.

It's not just pleasentness.  You should be _very_ careful with any
changes you make to this kind of code, and have a very clear
explanation why the change is needed, and why it won't do any trouble.

I didn't actually think about the sb_list stuff, but my feeling is you
should not move it unless there's a very clear reason to do so.

Miklos
-
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/