On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:13:42PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
No problem. Just we have to somehow coordinate with Christoph... Either
he can avoid touching ext4 and merge his patch set after you merge my patch
or he can take my patch instead of his ext4 change. Since my patch touches
only
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:54:25AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
ext4 abuse should be gone when Ted merges my rewrite of
ext4_page_mkwrite()... Ted, what happened to that patch. Should I resend
it?
So how should we coordinate merging the two?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:54:25AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
ext4_page_mkwrite()... Ted, what happened to that patch. Should I resend
it?
So assuming I fix the refcounting issue in fs/ext4/page_io.c (which I
will do not dropping the page's refcount until after the workqueue
finishes its job), does
On Mon 20-06-11 16:15:33, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
i_alloc_sem has always been a bit of an odd lock. It's the only remaining
rw_semaphore that can be released by a different thread than the one that
locked it, and it's use case in the core direct I/O code is more like a
counter given that the
i_alloc_sem has always been a bit of an odd lock. It's the only remaining
rw_semaphore that can be released by a different thread than the one that
locked it, and it's use case in the core direct I/O code is more like a
counter given that the writers already have external serialization.
This
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 04:15:33PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
This series removes it in favour of a simpler counter scheme, thus getting
rid of the rw_semaphore non-owner APIs as requests by Thomas, while at the
same time shrinking the size of struct inode by 160 bytes on 64-bit systems.
