Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext4/dir.c |2 +-
fs/ext4/inode.c |1 -
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: linux/fs/ext4/dir.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/ext4/dir.c
+++ linux/fs/ext4
None of the callers of this function does actually take the BKL
as far as I can see. So remove the comment refering to the BKL.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/jbd/recovery.c |2 +-
fs/jbd2/recovery.c |2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index
There is no BKL held on entry in -fsync nor in the low level ext3_sync_file.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext3/dir.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/fs/ext3/dir.c
No BKL used anywhere, so don't mention it.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext2/inode.c |1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/fs/ext2/inode.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/ext2/inode.c
+++ linux/fs/ext2
I checked ext2_ioctl and could not find anything in there that would
need the BKL. So convert it over to use unlocked_ioctl
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/ext2/dir.c |2 +-
fs/ext2/ext2.h |3 +--
fs/ext2/file.c |4 ++--
fs/ext2/ioctl.c | 12 +++-
4
Remove the BKL from the ext* ioctls.
This is a slightly updated version of the ext[2-4] patches that hit
linux-fsdevel earlier.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ext4 in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
I checked ext3_ioctl and it looked largely safe to not be used
without BKL. So convert it over to unlocked_ioctl.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
v1-v2: drop lock kernel for online growth. resize.c seems to do enough
locking
---
fs/ext3/dir.c |2 +-
fs/ext3/file.c
I checked ext4_ioctl and it looked largely safe to not be used
without BKL. So convert it over to unlocked_ioctl.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
v1-v2: drop BKL for online grow. resize.c seems to do enough locking
---
fs/ext4/dir.c |2 +-
fs/ext4/file.c
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Coding-style only changes tends to screw up our ability to merge
pending patches, but I'll take care of it, thanks.
Exactly. And looking at the patch the old code was already perfectly
readable anyways. Benefit about zero.
I also don't see how you can
Personally I find it annoying, but I'm willing to live with the
cleanup patches. I don't think they add anything, though. Maybe I
The problem I see is that if someone has a more involved outstanding
patch series against the code that is being cleaned up (and more complicated
features tend to
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 09:03:53PM +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
On Jan 4, 2008 8:41 PM, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I don't know, because people want to be able to say that they've
contributed fixes to the Linux kernel?
My pet theory is that it is similar
Theodore Tso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Certainly one of the things that we could consider is for small
directories to do an in-memory sort of all of the directory entries at
opendir() time, and keeping that list until it is closed. We can't do
this for really big directories, but we could
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:19:38PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jul 11, 2007 17:20 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
If you use a normal pseudo random number generator and print the seed
(e.g. create from the time) initially the image can be easily recreated
later without shipping it around
Kalpak Shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
There have been reported instances of a filesystem having been mounted at 2
places at the same time causing a lot of damage to the filesystem. This patch
reserves superblock fields and an INCOMPAT flag for adding multiple mount
protection(MMP)
Steve Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 10:19:04AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 09:15:28PM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
Hi Dave,
My recollection is that it used to default to on, it was disabled
because it needs to map
15 matches
Mail list logo
