From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>,
dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-lvm@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, agk@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Reverting "bd_mount_mutex" to "bd_mount_sem"
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:50:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4526C184.7070507@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060927135705.GA30311@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On debugging I found out that,"dmsetup suspend <device name>" calls
>> "freeze_bdev()",which locks "bd_mount_mutex" to make sure that no new
>> mounts happen on bdev until thaw_bdev() is called.
>> This "thaw_bdev()" is getting called when we resume the device
>> through "dmsetup resume <device-name>".
>> Hence we have 2 processes,one of which locks
>> "bd_mount_mutex"(dmsetup suspend) and Another(dmsetup resume) unlocks
>> it.
>
> hm, to me this seems quite a fragile construct - even if the
> mutex-debugging warning is worked around by reverting to a semaphore.
>
> Ingo
Ingo, what do you feel is fragile about this? It seems like this is a
reasonable way to go, except that maybe a down_trylock would be good if
a 2nd process tries to freeze while it's already frozen...
Thanks,
-Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, agk@redhat.com,
linux-lvm@redhat.com
Subject: [linux-lvm] Re: [RFC] Reverting "bd_mount_mutex" to "bd_mount_sem"
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:50:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4526C184.7070507@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060927135705.GA30311@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On debugging I found out that,"dmsetup suspend <device name>" calls
>> "freeze_bdev()",which locks "bd_mount_mutex" to make sure that no new
>> mounts happen on bdev until thaw_bdev() is called.
>> This "thaw_bdev()" is getting called when we resume the device
>> through "dmsetup resume <device-name>".
>> Hence we have 2 processes,one of which locks
>> "bd_mount_mutex"(dmsetup suspend) and Another(dmsetup resume) unlocks
>> it.
>
> hm, to me this seems quite a fragile construct - even if the
> mutex-debugging warning is worked around by reverting to a semaphore.
>
> Ingo
Ingo, what do you feel is fragile about this? It seems like this is a
reasonable way to go, except that maybe a down_trylock would be good if
a 2nd process tries to freeze while it's already frozen...
Thanks,
-Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-06 20:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-27 13:13 [RFC] Reverting "bd_mount_mutex" to "bd_mount_sem" Srinivasa Ds
2006-09-27 13:13 ` Srinivasa Ds
2006-09-27 13:13 ` [linux-lvm] " Srinivasa Ds
2006-09-27 13:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-09-27 13:57 ` [linux-lvm] " Ingo Molnar
2006-10-06 20:50 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2006-10-06 20:50 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-10 15:04 ` Srinivasa Ds
2006-10-10 15:04 ` [linux-lvm] " Srinivasa Ds
2006-10-10 15:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-10 15:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-10 15:19 ` [linux-lvm] " Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-23 8:39 ` Roger Lucas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4526C184.7070507@sandeen.net \
--to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=srinivasa@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.