In f2fs_lookup_extent_tree, et->cached_en was read and updated with only
read lock held,
it could cause __lookup_extent_tree within return entirely wrong
extent_node, if other
thread update et->cached_en just before __lookup_extent_tree return.
However, there are two things about this patch that need to be noticed:
1. It does no good to arrange the order of concurrent read/write, the result
would still
be random in such case.
2. It's built on this assumption: the mix up of reads and writes on a single
pointer would
not make the pointer partially wrong at any time. Please let me know if I'm
wrong, thx.
Signed-off-by: Fan li <fanofcode.li@samsung.com>
Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
f8b703da2c