Eric Sandeen 7ce9d5d1f3 ext4: fix ext4_free_inode() vs. ext4_claim_inode() race ... I was seeing fsck errors on inode bitmaps after a 4 thread dbench run on a 4 cpu machine: Inode bitmap differences: -50736 -(50752--50753) etc... I believe that this is because ext4_free_inode() uses atomic bitops, and although ext4_new_inode() *used* to also use atomic bitops for synchronization, commit 393418676a changed this to use the sb_bgl_lock, so that we could also synchronize against read_inode_bitmap and initialization of uninit inode tables. However, that change left ext4_free_inode using atomic bitops, which I think leaves no synchronization between setting & unsetting bits in the inode table. The below patch fixes it for me, although I wonder if we're getting at all heavy-handed with this spinlock... Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>		2009-03-04 18:38:18 -05:00
..
acl.c
acl.h
balloc.c
bitmap.c
dir.c
ext4_extents.h
ext4_i.h
ext4_jbd2.c
ext4_jbd2.h
ext4_sb.h
ext4.h
extents.c
file.c
fsync.c
group.h
hash.c
ialloc.c
inode.c
ioctl.c
Kconfig
Makefile
mballoc.c
mballoc.h
migrate.c
namei.c
namei.h
resize.c
super.c
symlink.c
xattr_security.c
xattr_trusted.c
xattr_user.c
xattr.c
xattr.h