On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 12:08:30AM -0500, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > * lock_parent(): who said that you won't get dentry moved
> > before managing to grab i_mutex on parent? While we are at it,
> > who said that you won't get dentry moved between fetching d_parent
> > and doing dget()? In that ca
> The commentary on the mem_notify threads claimed that the signal is
> easily provided by setting up the file handle for SIGIO.
BTW:
Of cource, you can receive any signal instead SIGIO by use fcntl(F_SETSIG) :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the bo
> > And from a performance point of view letting applications voluntarily
> > free some memory is better even than starting to swap.
>
> Absolutely.
the mem_notify patch can realize "just before starting swapping" notification :)
to be honest, I don't know fs guys requirement.
if lacking feature
KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > And from a performance point of view letting applications voluntarily
> > > free some memory is better even than starting to swap.
> >
> > Absolutely.
>
> the mem_notify patch can realize "just before starting swapping"
> notification :)
>
> to be honest, I don't know f
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 05:55:51PM -0800, Bryan Henderson wrote:
> I was surprised to see AIX do late allocation by default, because IBM's
> traditional style is bulletproof systems. A system where a process can be
> killed at unpredictable times because of resource demands of unrelated
> proce
Hi Al
> > the mem_notify patch can realize "just before starting swapping"
> > notification :)
> >
> > to be honest, I don't know fs guys requirement.
> > if lacking feature of fs guys needed, I implement it with presure if
> > you tell me it.
>
> These notifications are really useful, but it may
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Dmitri Vorobiev wrote:
- inode->i_mtime = inode->i_atime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
+ inode->i_mtime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
+ inode->i_atime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
+ inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
multiple assignments like "x = y = z = value;
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:42:30PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >I am also wondering whether we should have system call(s) for these:
> >
> >On Jan 25, 2008 12:59 PM, Takashi Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>+ case EXT3_IOC_FREEZE: {
> >
> >>+ case EXT3_IOC_THAW: {
> >
> >An
Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Dmitri Vorobiev wrote:
>> -inode->i_mtime = inode->i_atime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_mtime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_atime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>
> multiple assignment
Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Dmitri Vorobiev wrote:
>> -inode->i_mtime = inode->i_atime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_mtime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_atime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>> +inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC;
>
> multiple assignment
I checked ext4_ioctl and it looked largely safe to not be used
without BKL. So convert it over to unlocked_ioctl.
The only case where I wasn't quite sure was for the
dynamic fs grow ioctls versus umounting -- I kept the BKL for those.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by:
There is no BKL held on entry in ->fsync nor in the low level ext3_sync_file.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
===
BKL is not hold in any of those
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
===
- Replace remote_llseek with remote_llseek_unlocked (to force compilation
failures in all users)
- Change all users to either use remote_llseek directly or take the
BKL around. I changed the file systems who don't use the BKL
for anything (CIFS, GFS) to call it directly. NCPFS and SMBFS and NFS
t
Add a new fops entry point to allow fasync without BKL. While it's arguably
unclear this entry point is called often enough for it really matters
it was still relatively easy to do. And there are far less async users
in the tree than ioctls so it's likely they can be all converted
eventually and
Convert jfs_ioctl over to not use the BKL. The only potential race
I could see was with two ioctls in parallel changing the flags
and losing the updates. Use the i_mutex to protect against this.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/jfs/file.c |2 +
I checked ext3_ioctl and it looked largely safe to not be used
without BKL. So convert it over to unlocked_ioctl.
The only case where I wasn't quite sure was for the
dynamic fs grow ioctls versus umounting -- I kept the BKL for those.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by:
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 +++-
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
[Andrew: I believe this is -mm material for .25]
- Convert some more file systems (generally those who don't use the BKL
for anything except mount) to use unlocked_bkl.
- Implement BKL less fasync (see patch for the rationale)
This is currently a separate entry point, but since the number of fas
The ioctls were already compatible except for the actual values so this
was fairly easy to do.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/jfs/file.c |3 +++
fs/jfs/ioctl.c | 18 ++
fs/jfs/jfs_dinode.h |2 ++
fs/jfs/jfs_inode.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/pipe.c | 12 ++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Index: linux/fs/pipe.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/pipe.c
+++ linux/fs/pipe.c
@@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ const stru
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/fuse/dev.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/fs/fuse/dev.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/fuse/dev.c
+++ linux/fs/fuse/dev.c
@@
Not that it matters much, but it was easy.
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/bad_inode.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/fs/bad_inode.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/bad_inode.c
+++
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
net/socket.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux/net/socket.c
===
--- linux.orig/net/socket.c
+++ linux/net/socket.c
@@ -131
Similar to the compat handlers of other file systems. The ioctls
are compatible except that they have different numbers.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/cifs/cifsfs.c | 15 +++
fs/cifs/cifsfs.h |2 ++
fs/cifs/ioctl.c | 19
cifs_ioctl doesn't seem to need the BKL for anything, so convert it over
to use unlocked_ioctl.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/cifs/cifsfs.c | 10 +-
fs/cifs/cifsfs.h |4 ++--
fs/cifs/ioctl.c |4 ++--
3 files changed, 9 insertions(
As far as I can see there is nothing in ocfs2_ioctl that requires the BKL,
so use unlocked_ioctl
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/ocfs2/file.c |4 ++--
fs/ocfs2/ioctl.c | 12 +++-
fs/ocfs2/ioctl.h |3 +--
3 files changed, 6 insertion
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.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/jbd/recovery.c |2 +-
fs/jbd2/recovery.c |2 +-
2 files chan
Here's another patch that was missing in the previous BKL-removal series.
No BKL needed in pipe_ioctl
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux/fs/pipe.c
===
--- linux.orig/fs/pipe.c
+++ linux/fs/pipe.c
@@ -576,9 +
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:33:41 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Would you please consider these patches for -mm?
Sure, but I'm too lazy to pick through them and work out which ones need
updating, which ones got acked and which ones someone else merged, all on a
very b
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:23:45 +0900 Kyungmin Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch enables the uncompressed files support in cramfs.
>
> The word 'uncompressed file' is from linear cramfs (aka Application XIP).
> In linear cramfs, it is used to suport XIP on NOR. However it is als
> Add a new fops entry point to allow fasync without BKL. While it's arguably
> unclear this entry point is called often enough for it really matters
> it was still relatively easy to do. And there are far less async users
> in the tree than ioctls so it's likely they can be all converted
> eventua
33 matches
Mail list logo
