On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:34:45AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Removing it had a few side-effects. First of all, it made me move
> all of the operations on the counts of writers to underneath the
> spinlock that was already there. I guess this could be a cause
> for potential contention because there _are_ locks in the common
> code paths now. But, I do agree with Christoph that it would be
> awfully hard to get it contended.
>
> The other side-effect is that we can't have the bit in mnt_flags
> to be a shortcut to the superblock's writeable state since we
> don't have a way to go find the mounts and that bit when a fs
> changes writeable state. This causes a potential cache miss
> when we have to check the superblock directly during the
> relatively common __mnt_is_readonly() function.
Why? We _only_ need to check the vfsmount flag. vfsmount can
become r/w if the superblock is marked r/o which means the
underlying (block/network/etc) device is fundamentally not writeable.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
