>
> The two different uses of the superblock lock are really quite
> different; I don't see any particular problem with using two different
> locks for the two different things. Mount and the namespace code are
> not locking the same thing --- the fact that the resize code uses the
> superblock lock is really a historical side-effect of the fact that we
> used to use the same overloaded superblock lock in the ext2/ext3 block
> allocation layers to guard bitmap access.
>
>
At a first look, i thought about locking gdt-related data. But in a
closer one, it seemed to me that we're in fact modifying a little bit
more than that in the resize code. But all these modifications seem to
be somehow related to the ext3 super block specific data in
ext3_sb_info. My first naive approach would be adding a lock to that
struct
Besides that, by doing that, we become pretty much independent of vfs
locking decisions to handle ext3 data. Do you think it all make sense?
--
=====================================
Glauber de Oliveira Costa
IBM Linux Technology Center - Brazil
[email protected]
=====================================
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |