On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 13:50 -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 13:43 -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:05:44PM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> > > this patch changes the use of the read/write lock to force serialization
> > > on the branch table.
> > >
> > > basically, any entry point that can change it (ioctl for adding/changing
> > > mode/inc) is taken with write, while every other fs entry point (lookup,
> > > read, write....) is taken with read. basically to force the fs not to
> > > be in use when a branching operation is taking place.
> > >
> > > thoughts?
> >
> > I tried the patch, It failed on the regression tests :)
> >
> > A kernel BUG croped up in super.c:132, which happens with the bug418.sh
> > test.
>
> hmm, ok, thanks for showing me how to reproduce it. It happened to me
> once before, but then I made some other changes and wasn't able to
> reproduce it.
don't think its my bug. this isn't my branch removal code. the patch
shouldn't affect branch counts.
/* Make sure we have no leaks of branchget/branchput. */
for (bindex = bstart; bindex <= bend; bindex++)
BUG_ON(branch_count(sb, bindex) != 0);
could just be that my patch makes it easier to trigger.
on the positive/negative side, removing the putmap code makes me not see
it ever :)
_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
