Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] mm: export add_swap_extent()

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:34:45 -0700 Omar Sandoval wrote: > From: Omar Sandoval > > Btrfs will need this for swap file support. > Acked-by: Andrew Morton

Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] mm: split SWP_FILE into SWP_ACTIVATED and SWP_FS

former, > so split this flag into two. This makes us always call > ->swap_deactivate() if ->swap_activate() succeeded, not just if it > didn't add any swap extents itself. > > This also resolves the issue of the very misleading name of SWP_FILE, > which is only used for swap files over NFS. > Acked-by: Andrew Morton

Re: [Bug 199931] New: systemd/rtorrent file data corruption when using echo 3 >/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 06:22:25 +0900 Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/06/06 5:03, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > (switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the > > bugzilla web interface). > > > > On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 18:01:36 + bu

Re: [Bug 199931] New: systemd/rtorrent file data corruption when using echo 3 >/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches

(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 18:01:36 + bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199931 > > Bug ID: 199931 >Summary:

Re: [PATCH v3] kernel.h: Skip single-eval logic on literals in min()/max()

On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 21:28:57 -0700 Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Linus Torvalds > <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Andrew Morton > > <a...@linux-foundatio

Re: [PATCH v3] kernel.h: Skip single-eval logic on literals in min()/max()

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 17:30:15 -0800 Kees Cook wrote: > > It's one reason why I wondered if simplifying the expression to have > > just that single __builtin_constant_p() might not end up working.. > > Yeah, it seems like it doesn't bail out as "false" for complex >

Re: [PATCH v3] kernel.h: Skip single-eval logic on literals in min()/max()

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 16:28:51 -0800 Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:07 PM, Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> > wrote: > > > > A brief poke failed to reveal a workaround - gcc-4.4.4 doesn't appear > >

Re: [PATCH v3] kernel.h: Skip single-eval logic on literals in min()/max()

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 12:05:36 -0800 Kees Cook wrote: > When max() is used in stack array size calculations from literal values > (e.g. "char foo[max(sizeof(struct1), sizeof(struct2))]", the compiler > thinks this is a dynamic calculation due to the single-eval logic, which >

Re: [PATCH] kernel.h: Skip single-eval logic on literals in min()/max()

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 13:40:45 -0800 Kees Cook wrote: > When max() is used in stack array size calculations from literal values > (e.g. "char foo[max(sizeof(struct1), sizeof(struct2))]", the compiler > thinks this is a dynamic calculation due to the single-eval logic, which >

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Remove accidental VLA usage

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 09:02:36 -0600 Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 07:30:44PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > > This series adds SIMPLE_MAX() to be used in places where a stack array > > is actually fixed, but the compiler still warns about VLA usage due to > >

Re: [PATCH 01/10] remove mapping from balance_dirty_pages*()

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:56:47 -0500 Josef Bacik wrote: > From: Josef Bacik > > The only reason we pass in the mapping is to get the inode in order to see if > writeback cgroups is enabled, and even then it only checks the bdi and a super > block flag.

Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm: introduce memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} API

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 14:14:05 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote: > From: Michal Hocko > > GFP_NOFS context is used for the following 5 reasons currently > - to prevent from deadlocks when the lock held by the allocation > context would be needed during

Re: [PATCH v3] lib: add size unit t/p/e to memparse

On Wed, 2 Apr 2014 16:54:37 +0800 Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com wrote: For modern filesystems such as btrfs, t/p/e size level operations are common. add size unit t/p/e parsing to memparse Signed-off-by: Gui Hecheng guihc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com --- changelog v1-v2: replace

Re: [PATCH] rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:14:01 -0400 Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com wrote: Btrfs uses an rwsem to control access to its extent tree. Threads will hold a read lock on this rwsem while they scan the extent tree, and if need_resched() they will drop the lock and schedule. The transaction commit

Re: [PATCH 4/4] fs: remove obsolete simple_strtofoo

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 17:25:19 +0530 Abhijit Pawar abhi.c.pa...@gmail.com wrote: This patch replace the obsolete simple_strtofoo with kstrtofoo The XFS part (or something like it) has been applied. ... --- a/fs/9p/v9fs.c +++ b/fs/9p/v9fs.c @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ static int

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Update LZO compression

On Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:07:55 +0200 Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer mar...@oberhumer.com wrote: As requested by akpm I am sending my lzo-update branch at git://github.com/markus-oberhumer/linux.git lzo-update to lkml as a patch series created by git format-patch -M v3.5..lzo-update. You can

Re: [GIT PULL v2] Update LZO compression

On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:48:46 +0200 richard -rw- weinberger richard.weinber...@gmail.com wrote: CC'in akpm. Thanks. Hi all, I finally have prepared a small package that updates the LZO version in the Linux kernel. Please get it from:

Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 09:06:28 +0200 Marco Stornelli marco.storne...@gmail.com wrote: Il 09/06/2012 02:28, Andrew Morton ha scritto: On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:46:47 -0700 Linus Torvaldstorva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Of course, if you just mean having a VFS wrapper that does

Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:41:03 +0300 Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote: There's no reason to call rcu_barrier() on every deactivate_locked_super(). We only need to make sure that all delayed rcu free inodes are flushed before we destroy related cache. Removing

Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 01:14:46 +0300 Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:02:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:41:03 +0300 Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote: There's no reason to call rcu_barrier

Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 02:31:27 +0300 Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:31:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 23:27:34 +0100 Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk wrote: On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:25:50PM -0700, Andrew Morton

Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:46:47 -0700 Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Of course, if you just mean having a VFS wrapper that does static void vfs_inode_kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cachep) { rcu_barrier(); kmem_cache_destroy(cachep); }

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Tue, 5 Jun 2012 02:46:29 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: KERN_LEVEL currently takes up 3 bytes. Shrink the kernel size by using an ASCII SOH and then the level byte. Remove the need for KERN_CONT. Convert directly embedded uses of . to KERN_LEVEL What an epic patchset. I guess

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 15:11:43 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 14:28 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: Unfortunately the n thing is part of the kernel ABI: echo 4foo /dev/kmsg Which works the same way it did before. I didn't say it didn't. What I did say

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:55:00 +0200 Kay Sievers k...@vrfy.org wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 14:28 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: devkmsg_writev() does weird and wonderful things with facilities/levels. That function incorrectly returns success when copy_from_user() faults, btw. Oh. Better

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 16:52:25 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 01:48 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 01:39 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: # echo \001Hello Andrew /dev/kmsg

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:07:27 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 16:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: echo \0014Hello Joe /dev/kmsg # echo -e \x014Hello Me /dev/kmsg gives: 12,778,4057982669;Hello Me That's changed behavior. On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 02:28:39 +0200

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rework KERN_LEVEL

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:40:05 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 17:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:07:27 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 16:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: echo \0014Hello Joe /dev

Re: [PATCH 1/2] treewide: fix memory corruptions when TASK_COMM_LEN != 16

On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:19:28 +0100 (CET) Jan Engelhardt jeng...@medozas.de wrote: On Thursday 2012-02-23 10:57, Andrew Morton wrote: But there's more, 24931 ?S 0:00 \_ [btrfs-endio-met] \_ [kconservative/5

Re: [patch 2/4] mm: writeback: distribute write pages across allowable zones

On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:45:13 +0200 Johannes Weiner jwei...@redhat.com wrote: This patch allows allocators to pass __GFP_WRITE when they know in advance that the allocated page will be written to and become dirty soon. The page allocator will then attempt to distribute those allocations

Re: [PATCH V8 4/8] mm/fs: add hooks to support cleancache

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Dan Magenheimer dan.magenhei...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Minchan -- First of all, thanks for resolving conflict with my patch. You're welcome! As I pointed out offlist, yours was the first change in MM that caused any semantic changes to the

Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 29302] New: Null pointer dereference with large max_sectors_kb

On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 14:16:12 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote: Are there any more kernel messages involved before the oops starts? The full dmesg is in bugzilla. https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29302 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe

Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 29302] New: Null pointer dereference with large max_sectors_kb

(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:20:20 GMT bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29302 Summary: Null pointer dereference with large

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:48:33 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 10:42 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:30:47 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: I don't know if this is worth addressing. Perhaps require that the filp refers

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:21:49 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: It seems to return a single offset/length tuple which refers to the btrfs metadata file, with the intent that this tuple later be fed into a btrfs-specific readahead ioctl. I can see how this might be used with

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:38:18 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: ext2, minix and probably others create an address_space for each directory. Heaven knows what xfs does (for example). yes, this is for one directiory, but the all files's metadata are in block_dev address_space. I

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:12:33 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 13:55 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:38:18 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: ext2, minix and probably others create an address_space for each directory

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:19:50 +0800 Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 02:12:33PM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote: On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 13:55 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:38:18 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: ext2

Re: [Bug 26242] New: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at (null)

(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface). On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 20:59:08 GMT bugzilla-dae...@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26242 Summary: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer

Re: [RFC 1/5] add metadata_incore ioctl in vfs

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:22:10 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: Add an ioctl to dump filesystem's metadata in memory in vfs. Userspace collects such info and uses it to do metadata readahead. Filesystem can hook to super_operations.metadata_incore to get metadata in specific

Re: [RFC 2/5] implement metadata_incore in btrfs

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:22:11 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: Implement btrfs specific .metadata_incore. In btrfs, all metadata pages are in a special btree_inode, we take pages from it. we only account updated and referenced pages here. Say we collect metadata info in one

Re: [RFC 3/5]add metadata_readahead ioctl in vfs

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:22:14 +0800 Shaohua Li shaohua...@intel.com wrote: Add metadata readahead ioctl in vfs. Filesystem can hook to super_operations.metadata_readahead to handle filesystem specific task. Next patch will give an example how btrfs implements it. Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li

Re: [patch] fs: fix deadlocks in writeback_if_idle

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:53:56 +1100 Nick Piggin npig...@kernel.dk wrote: On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 02:10:28PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: On Wed 24-11-10 12:03:43, Nick Piggin wrote: For the _nr variant that btrfs uses, it's worse for the filesystems that don't have a 1:1 bdi-sb

Re: [patch] fs: fix deadlocks in writeback_if_idle

On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 11:41:50 +0200 Boaz Harrosh bharr...@panasas.com wrote: On 11/25/2010 12:47 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 07:34:07 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote: For btrfs there's only one bdi per SB, but for most everyone else a disk with a bunch

Re: [patch] fs: fix deadlocks in writeback_if_idle

On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 07:34:07 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote: For btrfs there's only one bdi per SB, but for most everyone else a disk with a bunch of partitions is going to have multiple filesystems on the same bdi. um, please explain why that wasn't idiotic? The BDI is a

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:18:13 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/17/10 12:10 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:05:52PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: On 11/16/10 10:38 PM, Nick Piggin wrote: as for the locking problems ... sorry about that! That's no problem.

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:55:18 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: Can we just delete writeback_inodes_sb_nr_if_idle() and writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle()? The changelog for 17bd55d037a02 is pretty handwavy - do we know that deleting these things would make a jot of difference?

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:18:22 +1100 Nick Piggin npig...@kernel.dk wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:28:34PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: Logically I'd expect i_mutex to nest inside s_umount. Because s_umount is a per-superblock thing, and i_mutex is a per-file thing, and files live under

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:04:21 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/18/10 11:10 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:55:18 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: Can we just delete writeback_inodes_sb_nr_if_idle() and writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:02:43 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/18/10 12:36 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:04:21 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/18/10 11:10 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 08:55:18 -0600 Eric Sandeen sand

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:51:15 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote: If those functions fix a testcase then it was by sheer luck, and the fs's ENOSPC handling is still busted. For a start writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle() is a no-op if the device isn't idle! Secondly, if the

Re: [patch] fix up lock order reversal in writeback

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:06:13 -0500 Ted Ts'o ty...@mit.edu wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 05:10:57PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:05:52PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: On 11/16/10 10:38 PM, Nick Piggin wrote: as for the locking problems ... sorry about that!

Re: [Btrfs-devel] [patch] O_DIRECT: fix the splitting up of contiguous I/O

On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 22:56:08 +1000 Chris Samuel ch...@csamuel.org wrote: On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 12:25:01 am Christoph Hellwig wrote: Andrew, can you please send this on to Linus and -stable ASAP? It's causing massive problems for our users. Did this patch get dropped ? Nope. I have it

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Btrfs: add basic DIO read/write support V3

On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:31:45 -0400 Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:14:30AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 04:40:53PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: V1-V2 -Use __blockdev_direct_IO instead of helper -Use KM_IRQ0 for kmap instead of

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Btrfs: add basic DIO read/write support V3

On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:01:37 -0400 Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:26:39AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:31:45AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: AIO's aio_complete does kmap with KM_IRQ0/1 and it gets called in the same context as the

Re: [GIT PULL] adaptive spinning mutexes

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:14:35 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:00:08 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:33:19 +0100

Re: [GIT PULL] adaptive spinning mutexes

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:27:36 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Peter Zijlstra a.p.zijls...@chello.nl wrote: On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 11:36 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: Do people enable CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG? Well, I have it always enabled, but I've honestly no idea if that makes

Re: [GIT PULL] adaptive spinning mutexes

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:51:22 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Do people enable CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG? If they suspect performance problems and want to analyze them? The vast majority of users do not and usually cannot

Re: [GIT PULL] adaptive spinning mutexes

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:14:58 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:51:22 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Do people enable

Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 02:01:25 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: may_inline/inline_hint is a longer, less known and uglier keyword. Hey, your choice, should you decide to accept it,

Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:35:31 +0100 Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote: On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 05:44:25PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Harvey Harrison wrote: We might still try the second or third options, as i think we shouldnt go back into the business of managing the inline

Re: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:37:40 +0100 Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote: But we can do that with __get_user(thread_info-cpu) (very unlikely page fault protection due to the possibility of CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC) and then validating the cpu. It it's in range, we can use it and verify

Re: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:32:22 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: We could do the whole oldfs = get_fs(); set_fs(KERNEL_DS); .. set_fs(oldfs); crud, but it would probably be better to just add an architected accessor. Especially since it's going to generally just be a #define

Re: [PATCH][RFC]: mutex: adaptive spin

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:40:31 +0100 Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote: Subject: mutex: adaptive spin From: Peter Zijlstra a.p.zijls...@chello.nl Date: Tue Jan 06 12:32:12 CET 2009 Based on the code in -rt, provide adaptive spins on generic mutexes. How dumb is it to send a lump of

Re: Btrfs for mainline

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:28:55 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote: Hello everyone, Hi! I've done some testing against Linus' git tree from last night and the current btrfs trees still work well. what's btrfs? I think I've heard the name before, but I've never seen the patches :)

Re: Notes on support for multiple devices for a single filesystem

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:23:44 -0500 Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote: FYI: here's a little writeup I did this summer on support for filesystems spanning multiple block devices: -- === Notes on support for multiple devices for a single filesystem === == Intro == Btrfs

Re: Btrfs trees for linux-next

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:14:36 +1100 Stephen Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Andrew, On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:34:56 -0500 Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just an update, while I still have a long todo list and plenty of things to fix in the code, these src trees have been updated