[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090109003239.06f73bd1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:32:39 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Grissiom <chaos.proton@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] async: Don't call async_synchronize_full_special()
while holding sb_lock
On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:51:52 -0800
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 09:46:31AM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> >> sync_filesystems() shouldn't be calling async_synchronize_full_special
> >> while holding a spinlock. The second while loop in that function is the
> >> right place for this anyway.
> >
> > Out of curiousity, what on earth does
> > async_synchronize_full_special() do and why does it need to be in
> > sync_filesystems()?
> >
> now that we have asynchronous operations, this function makes sure that all the functions
> that we started async before this point complete, so that what when you sync, you sync all in progress work.
So why is it special - wouldn't async_synchronize_all() be a bit (or
complete_all) be a bit more clear ?
Alan
--
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