> Hmm, may be, since vnode must be interlocked by ffs_sync() after > MNTK_SUSPENDED set, and before MNTK_SUSPEND, mount interlock is not > needed in ufs_itimes. > > Tor ?
If neither IN_CHANGE nor IN_UPDATE is set then it might be unsafe to set IN_MODIFIED in ufs_itimes() since the file system might be suspended or in the process of being suspended with the vnode sync loop in ffs_sync() having iterated past the vnode. I don't think the mount interlock is needed to check for MNTK_SUSPEND being set in ufs_itimes() as long as the vnode interlock is held. If a stale value is read without MNTK_SUSPEND set then the vnode sync loop in ffs_sync() cannot have iterated past the vnode, thus it should still be safe to set IN_MODIFIED. All writes by the CPU performing the vnode sync loop before it released the vnode interlock for the same vnode should be visible to the CPU in ufs_itimes() after it has obtained the vnode interlock. - Tor Egge _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
