From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gocosta@br.ibm.com>
To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Cc: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gocosta@br.ibm.com>,
"ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
ext2resize-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Al Viro <viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ext3 online resizing locking issue
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 08:35:06 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050831113506.GM23782@br.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1125410818.1910.52.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk>
>
> The two different uses of the superblock lock are really quite
> different; I don't see any particular problem with using two different
> locks for the two different things. Mount and the namespace code are
> not locking the same thing --- the fact that the resize code uses the
> superblock lock is really a historical side-effect of the fact that we
> used to use the same overloaded superblock lock in the ext2/ext3 block
> allocation layers to guard bitmap access.
>
>
At a first look, i thought about locking gdt-related data. But in a
closer one, it seemed to me that we're in fact modifying a little bit
more than that in the resize code. But all these modifications seem to
be somehow related to the ext3 super block specific data in
ext3_sb_info. My first naive approach would be adding a lock to that
struct
Besides that, by doing that, we become pretty much independent of vfs
locking decisions to handle ext3 data. Do you think it all make sense?
--
=====================================
Glauber de Oliveira Costa
IBM Linux Technology Center - Brazil
gocosta@br.ibm.com
=====================================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-31 11:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-24 21:03 [PATCH] Ext3 online resizing locking issue Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2005-08-25 19:02 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-08-25 20:43 ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2005-08-30 14:06 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-08-31 11:35 ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa [this message]
2005-08-31 13:30 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-09-01 23:04 ` [PATCH][RFC] Ext3 online resizing locking issue (Again) Glauber de Oliveira Costa
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=20050831113506.GM23782@br.ibm.com \
--to=gocosta@br.ibm.com \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ext2resize-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox