[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1345122611.3393.225.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:10:11 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>, bhalevy@...ian.com,
jack@...e.cz, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, tytso@....edu,
hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp, mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, hch@...radead.org,
dushistov@...l.ru, osd-dev@...n-osd.org,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] exofs: remove lock/unlock super
On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 15:32 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 08/16/2012 03:20 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 12:00 +0200, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> >> From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
> >>
> >> Remove lock and unlock super operation.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
> >
> > Acked-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>
> >
>
>
> Are you sure? It used to be that exofs_sync_fs() could be called
> concurrently.
>
> What about two "bash -c sync" calls or a sync and an unmount
> in parallel. anything protecting that?
>
> If so then sure, but please let me test first.
Umm, actually we will probably end up writing the same twice without the
lock.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists