[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200911021229.02332.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 12:29:02 +0100
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/27] Push down BKL to the filesystems (v2)
Am Montag 02 November 2009 11:04:40 schrieb Jan Blunck:
> During the realtime preemption mini-summit we discussed the entire removal
> of the big kernel lock. I've started working on this for some filesystems.
> My plan is to push the BKL down to the implementations first and remove it
> from there later.
>
> This series is pushing the BKL from do_new_mount() down to the filesystems
> and removes it from ext series of filesystems and one other trivial use:
> if the BKL is only used in get_sb/fill_super due to the push-down, we just
> need to make sure that parallel calls to get_sb/fill_super would race
> against each other.
seems that patch 1 (the pushdown) did not yet made it to the list. Looking at
you diffstat it seems that you only touched fs/*
There are filesystems in other places, e.g.
drivers/isdn/capi/capifs.c,
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
or
arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c
I am really not an expert in filesystems, so my comment might be bogus: My
expection was, that a simple pushdown should also affect these filesystems,
especially if the filesystems dont use simple_fill_super, no?
--
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