[patch 80/87] jbd2: Update locking coments

Greg KH
2009-06-09T10:36:55Z

[-- Attachment #1: jbd2-update-locking-coments.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2511 bytes --]

2.6.29-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

(cherry picked from commit 86db97c87f744364d5889ca8a4134ca2048b8f83)

Update information about locking in JBD2 revoke code. Inconsistency in
comments found by Lin Tan <tammy000@gmail.com>

CC: Lin Tan <tammy000@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
---
fs/jbd2/revoke.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/jbd2/revoke.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/revoke.c
@@ -55,6 +55,25 @@
* need do nothing.
* RevokeValid set, Revoked set:
* buffer has been revoked.
+ *
+ * Locking rules:
+ * We keep two hash tables of revoke records. One hashtable belongs to the
+ * running transaction (is pointed to by journal->j_revoke), the other one
+ * belongs to the committing transaction. Accesses to the second hash table
+ * happen only from the kjournald and no other thread touches this table. Also
+ * journal_switch_revoke_table() which switches which hashtable belongs to the
+ * running and which to the committing transaction is called only from
+ * kjournald. Therefore we need no locks when accessing the hashtable belonging
+ * to the committing transaction.
+ *
+ * All users operating on the hash table belonging to the running transaction
+ * have a handle to the transaction. Therefore they are safe from kjournald
+ * switching hash tables under them. For operations on the lists of entries in
+ * the hash table j_revoke_lock is used.
+ *
+ * Finally, also replay code uses the hash tables but at this moment noone else
+ * can touch them (filesystem isn't mounted yet) and hence no locking is
+ * needed.
*/

#ifndef __KERNEL__
@@ -401,8 +420,6 @@ int jbd2_journal_revoke(handle_t *handle
* the second time we would still have a pending revoke to cancel. So,
* do not trust the Revoked bit on buffers unless RevokeValid is also
* set.
- *
- * The caller must have the journal locked.
*/
int jbd2_journal_cancel_revoke(handle_t *handle, struct journal_head *jh)
{
@@ -480,10 +497,7 @@ void jbd2_journal_switch_revoke_table(jo
/*
* Write revoke records to the journal for all entries in the current
* revoke hash, deleting the entries as we go.
- *
- * Called with the journal lock held.
*/
-
void jbd2_journal_write_revoke_records(journal_t *journal,
transaction_t *transaction)
{