Andrew Morton writes:
> Nikita Danilov wrote:
> >
[...]
> > struct inode *inode;
> >
> > inode = list_entry(head->next, struct inode, i_list);
> > - list_del(&inode->i_list);
> > + list_del_init(&inode->i_list);
> >
> > if (inode->i_data.nrpages)
> > truncate_inode_pages(&inode->i_data, 0);
> >
>
> That's i_list, not i_hash.
>
> Yes, it's a bit sloppy to leave the i_list pointers dangling but
> fs/inode.c:new_inode() will just overwrite i_list and all is well.
>
> Could you please double-check or clarify the need for this change?
You are right, sorry. Probably I stared at these lists for too long or
too short a time. We are seeing garbage on sb->s_io in sync_sb_inodes(),
but probably this is some reiser4 problem after all.
Nikita.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 31 2002 - 22:00:10 EST