On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 12:13:56PM -0500, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote:
> Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> > This patch needs splitting up so that independent changes can be
> > considered separately.
> > c.f. The proposal from Mike Anderson (repeated below) which I prefer
> > because it makes it clear that a table always belongs to exactly one md.
> I like his proposed patch.
> The interface is useful for my purpose too and moving table
> creation inside _hash_lock means I don't need dm_get() neither.
The global _hash_lock should not be held (thereby locking out most dm ioctl
operations on any device) while the slow populate_table() runs.
I'm trying out a variant of the patch that drops and reacquires that lock.
Alasdair
--
[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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
