[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090428171445.GD24043@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:14:45 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Developers List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ext4: Avoid races caused by on-line resizing and
SMP memory reordering
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 06:23:59PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Ouch... Hmm, smp_rmb() isn't completely free and mainly it's a bit
> ugly and prone to errors (I'm afraid next time someone changes the
> allocation code, we miss some barriers again)... so.. Maybe a stupid
> idea but wouldn't it be easier to solve the online resize like: freeze
> the filesystem, do all the changes required for extend, unfreeze the
> filesystem?
Eric suggested a helper function when reading from s_groups_count.
That would take care of the code maintenance headache. One problem
with using freeze/thaw is it won't work without a journal, and we do
support filesystems without journals in ext4. (Probably the best
solution for netbooks with crapola SSD's.)
As far as smb_rmb() not being free, it's essentially free for
x86/x86_64 platforms. Is it really that costly on other
architectures?
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists