| Message ID | 1603271728-7198-5-git-send-email-brookxu@tencent.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/8] ext4: use ext4_assert() to replace J_ASSERT() | expand |
On Oct 21, 2020, at 3:15 AM, Chunguang Xu <brookxu.cn@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Chunguang Xu <brookxu@tencent.com> > > Since ext4_data_block_valid() has been renamed to ext4_inode_block_valid(), > the related comments need to be updated. > > Signed-off-by: Chunguang Xu <brookxu@tencent.com> Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> > --- > fs/ext4/block_validity.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/block_validity.c b/fs/ext4/block_validity.c > index 37025e3..07e9dc3 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/block_validity.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/block_validity.c > @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ static void ext4_destroy_system_zone(struct rcu_head *rcu) > * > * The update of system_blks pointer in this function is protected by > * sb->s_umount semaphore. However we have to be careful as we can be > - * racing with ext4_data_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree > + * racing with ext4_inode_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree > * protected only by RCU. That's why we first build the rbtree and then > * swap it in place. > */ > @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ int ext4_setup_system_zone(struct super_block *sb) > > /* > * System blks rbtree complete, announce it once to prevent racing > - * with ext4_data_block_valid() accessing the rbtree at the same > + * with ext4_inode_block_valid() accessing the rbtree at the same > * time. > */ > rcu_assign_pointer(sbi->s_system_blks, system_blks); > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ int ext4_setup_system_zone(struct super_block *sb) > * > * The update of system_blks pointer in this function is protected by > * sb->s_umount semaphore. However we have to be careful as we can be > - * racing with ext4_data_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree > + * racing with ext4_inode_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree > * protected only by RCU. So we first clear the system_blks pointer and > * then free the rbtree only after RCU grace period expires. > */ > -- > 1.8.3.1 > Cheers, Andreas
diff --git a/fs/ext4/block_validity.c b/fs/ext4/block_validity.c index 37025e3..07e9dc3 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/block_validity.c +++ b/fs/ext4/block_validity.c @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ static void ext4_destroy_system_zone(struct rcu_head *rcu) * * The update of system_blks pointer in this function is protected by * sb->s_umount semaphore. However we have to be careful as we can be - * racing with ext4_data_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree + * racing with ext4_inode_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree * protected only by RCU. That's why we first build the rbtree and then * swap it in place. */ @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ int ext4_setup_system_zone(struct super_block *sb) /* * System blks rbtree complete, announce it once to prevent racing - * with ext4_data_block_valid() accessing the rbtree at the same + * with ext4_inode_block_valid() accessing the rbtree at the same * time. */ rcu_assign_pointer(sbi->s_system_blks, system_blks); @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ int ext4_setup_system_zone(struct super_block *sb) * * The update of system_blks pointer in this function is protected by * sb->s_umount semaphore. However we have to be careful as we can be - * racing with ext4_data_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree + * racing with ext4_inode_block_valid() calls reading system_blks rbtree * protected only by RCU. So we first clear the system_blks pointer and * then free the rbtree only after RCU grace period expires. */