On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 12:14 -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Replace all the lock_kernel() instances with reiserfs_write_lock(sb),
> > and make that use an actual per super-block mutex instead of
> > lock_kernel().
> >
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Replace all the lock_kernel() instances with reiserfs_write_lock(sb),
> and make that use an actual per super-block mutex instead of
> lock_kernel().
>
> This should make reiserfs safe from PREEMPT_BKL=n, since it seems to
>
Hi all,
Obviously nobody still uses reiserfs; or at least not with
PREEMPT_BKL=n.
We seem to have grown all kinds of scheduling assumptions all over that
code. A excerpt from my bootlog when I tried:
| preempt count: 0001 ]
| 1-level deep critical section nesting:
Hi all,
Obviously nobody still uses reiserfs; or at least not with
PREEMPT_BKL=n.
We seem to have grown all kinds of scheduling assumptions all over that
code. A excerpt from my bootlog when I tried:
| preempt count: 0001 ]
| 1-level deep critical section nesting:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Replace all the lock_kernel() instances with reiserfs_write_lock(sb),
and make that use an actual per super-block mutex instead of
lock_kernel().
This should make reiserfs safe from PREEMPT_BKL=n, since it seems to
rely on
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 12:14 -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Replace all the lock_kernel() instances with reiserfs_write_lock(sb),
and make that use an actual per super-block mutex instead of
lock_kernel().
This should
6 matches
Mail list logo
