[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061108082722.GH8394166@melbourne.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:27:22 +1100
From: David Chinner <dgc@....com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srinivasa DS <srinivasa@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:01:09AM +0000, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 12:42:02AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 8 November 2006 00:18, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > > But, how is a stampede of fs-freezers -supposed- to work? I could
> > > imagine something like a freezer count, and the filesystem is only
> > > unfrozen after everyone has thawed? Or should only one freezer be
> > > active at a time... which is what we have now I guess.
> > I think it shouldn't be possible to freeze an fs more than once.
>
> In device-mapper today, the only way to get more than one freeze on the
> same device is to use xfs and issue xfs_freeze before creating an lvm snapshot
> (or issuing the dmsetup equivalent), and at the moment we tell people not to do
> that any more.
But it's trivial to detect this condition - if (sb->s_frozen != SB_UNFROZEN)
then the filesystem is already frozen and you shouldn't try to freeze
it again. It's simple to do, and the whole problem then just goes away....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists