Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+1\/4\]\s+fs\:\s+Improve\s+filesystem\s+freezing\s+handling\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+1\/4\]\s+fs\:\s+Improve\s+filesystem\s+freezing\s+handling\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 02:20:50 +0100; Currently, exclusion between ->page_mkwrite() and filesystem freezing has been handled by setting page dirty and then verifying s_frozen. This guaranteed that either the freezing code sees the faulte; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00140.html (17,560 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:53:35 -0700; Since this function is needed for calling __block_page_mkwrite(), which is EXPORT_SYMBOL(), both sb_start_write() and sb_end_write() themselves need to be EXPORT_SYMBOL(). Cheers, Andreas; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00172.html (23,011 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:07:53 +0100; Good point. Fixed. Thanks. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00174.html (12,342 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:57:42 -0600; isn't this s->s_writers? s->s_page_faults isn't defined anywhere. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ s/b sb_end_write wait for s_writers, right?; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00184.html (22,622 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:15:13 +0100; Right. Leftover from original implementation and since I was doing initial testing only using UML, I didn't spot this. Thanks. Fixed. Yes. Fixed. Thanks for review. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> S; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00185.html (13,037 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:26:43 +1100; I really dislike this type of open coded per-cpu counter implementation. I can't see that there is no good reason to use it over percpu_counters here which abstract all this mess away. i.e. it is rel; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00187.html (11,423 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: Improve filesystem freezing handling (score: 1): Author: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:12:20 +0100; Well, I just did it the way mnt_want_write / mnt_put_write does it. But you are right that it's unnecessary so it's a good idea to switch the code to using per-cpu counters. Thanks for the idea. Honz; /archives/xfs/2012-01/msg00194.html (12,261 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 7
Page: [1]