Hi,
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 05:24, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Well, I just spent several hours trying to use the b_update_lock in
> implementing something to replace the bit spinlocks for RT. It's
> getting really ugly and I just hit a stone wall.
>
> The problem is that I have two locks to work with. A
> jbd_lock_bh_journal_head and a jbd_lock_bh_state. ...
For now, yes.
> So, the only other solutions that I can think of is:
>
> a) add yet another (bloat) lock to the buffer head.
This one looks like the right answer for now, just to get the patch
series running. I've got a WIP patch under development which removes
the bh_journal_head lock entirely; if that works out, you may find
things get a bit easier.
--Stephen
-
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/
- References:
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
- Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|