From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ->write_super lock_super pushdown Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 14:40:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20090512134045.GN8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20090511213503.GB19326@lst.de> <4A094B02.20606@panasas.com> <20090512132504.GA19872@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Boaz Harrosh , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:59300 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752062AbZELNkr (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 09:40:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090512132504.GA19872@lst.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 03:25:04PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > lock kernel is the big kernel lock as in the very first lock that was > added when Linux grew SMP support. If you filesystem does internal > locking you most likely don't need this one at all. The only superblock > method still called with the BKL in the vfs tree is remount, but it > will most likely be gone before 2.6.31, too. After that you can do > a quick audit if there was anything it protected against and remove it. Don't forget that ->get_sb() on mount(2) is also under BKL. Not a superblock method, for obvious reasons.