[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1169129730.7295.10.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 08:15:30 -0600
From: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
JFS Discussion <jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH: 2.6.20-rc4-mm1] JFS: Avoid deadlock introduced by
explicit I/O plugging
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 01:30 -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:55:49PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > /*
> > * jfs_lock.h
> > @@ -42,6 +43,7 @@ do { \
> > if (cond) \
> > break; \
> > unlock_cmd; \
> > + blk_replug_current_nested(); \
> > schedule(); \
> > lock_cmd; \
> > } \
>
> Is {,un}lock_cmd a macro? ...
They are the commands passed into this macro (as arguments) to
release/take a lock. This is a home-grown wait_on_event type macro
where the condition must be checked while holding a lock. And the
commands passed in are themselves macros. The jfs code could probably
be cleaned up a bit as far as excessive use of macros for locking, but
it's been working for a few years with few problems.
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
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