| To: | Peter Leckie <pleckie@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH v2] Use atomic_t and wait_event to track dquot pincount |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 25 Sep 2008 05:12:06 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, xfs-dev@xxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <48DB4F3F.8040307@sgi.com> |
| References: | <48D9C1DD.6030607@sgi.com> <48D9EB8F.1070104@sgi.com> <48D9EF6E.8010505@sgi.com> <20080924074604.GK5448@disturbed> <48D9F718.4010905@sgi.com> <20080925010318.GB27997@disturbed> <48DB4F3F.8040307@sgi.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 06:43:43PM +1000, Peter Leckie wrote: > So I would say the fix I proposed is a good solution for this issue. > > However there are other functions that use sv_wait and should also be > fixed in a similar way so I'll > look into the other callers and prepare a patch tomorrow. Note that most users of sv_wait do actually re-check the condition. It's just that wait_event enforces it in the API while sv_wait doesn't make it as explicit. But another audit of this would be a good thing. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Speed of rm compared to reiserfs (slow), gus3 |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 2.6.27-rc7 no init found on the root partition?, Lukas Hejtmanek |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH v2] Use atomic_t and wait_event to track dquot pincount, Peter Leckie |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH v2] Use atomic_t and wait_event to track dquot pincount, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |