> OK... So here's what we really want:
> * we know that nobody will set cpu_writer->mnt to mnt from now on
> * all changes to that sucker are done under cpu_writer->lock
> * we want the laziest equivalent of
> spin_lock(&cpu_writer->lock);
> if (likely(cpu_writer->mnt != mnt)) {
> spin_unlock(&cpu_writer->lock);
> continue;
> }
> /* do stuff */
> that would make sure we won't miss earlier setting of ->mnt done by another
> CPU.
>
If this is done, I'll be available to test it.
> Anyway, for now (HEAD and all -stable starting with 2.6.26) we want this:
>
And here is my:
Tested-by: Li Zefan <l...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> --- fs/namespace.c 2009-01-25 21:45:31.000000000 -0500
> +++ fs/namespace.c 2009-02-15 21:31:14.000000000 -0500
> @@ -614,9 +614,11 @@
> */
> for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> struct mnt_writer *cpu_writer = &per_cpu(mnt_writers, cpu);
> - if (cpu_writer->mnt != mnt)
> - continue;
> spin_lock(&cpu_writer->lock);
> + if (cpu_writer->mnt != mnt) {
> + spin_unlock(&cpu_writer->lock);
> + continue;
> + }
> atomic_add(cpu_writer->count, &mnt->__mnt_writers);
> cpu_writer->count = 0;
> /*
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
