ufs: ufs_trunc_...() has exclusion with everything that might cause allocations
Currently - on lock_ufs(), eventually - on per-inode mutex.
lock_ufs() used to be mere BKL, which is much weaker, so it needed
those rechecks. BKL doesn't provide any exclusion once we lose CPU;
its blind replacement, OTOH, _does_. Making that per-filesystem was
an atrocity, but at least we can simplify life here. And yes, we
certainly need to make that sucker per-inode - these days inode.c and
truncate.c uses are needed only to protect the block pointers.
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
diff --git a/fs/ufs/truncate.c b/fs/ufs/truncate.c
index c56f4ef..3beaa84 100644
--- a/fs/ufs/truncate.c
+++ b/fs/ufs/truncate.c
@@ -195,10 +195,6 @@
if (!tmp)
return 0;
ind_ubh = ubh_bread(sb, tmp, uspi->s_bsize);
- if (tmp != ufs_data_ptr_to_cpu(sb, p)) {
- ubh_brelse (ind_ubh);
- return 1;
- }
if (!ind_ubh) {
write_seqlock(&UFS_I(inode)->meta_lock);
ufs_data_ptr_clear(uspi, p);
@@ -280,10 +276,6 @@
if (!tmp)
return 0;
dind_bh = ubh_bread(sb, tmp, uspi->s_bsize);
- if (tmp != ufs_data_ptr_to_cpu(sb, p)) {
- ubh_brelse (dind_bh);
- return 1;
- }
if (!dind_bh) {
write_seqlock(&UFS_I(inode)->meta_lock);
ufs_data_ptr_clear(uspi, p);
@@ -345,10 +337,6 @@
if (!(tmp = ufs_data_ptr_to_cpu(sb, p)))
return 0;
tind_bh = ubh_bread (sb, tmp, uspi->s_bsize);
- if (tmp != ufs_data_ptr_to_cpu(sb, p)) {
- ubh_brelse (tind_bh);
- return 1;
- }
if (!tind_bh) {
write_seqlock(&ufsi->meta_lock);
ufs_data_ptr_clear(uspi, p);