On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, > > > > Since I haven't gotten a response from you, > > It sometimes takes me half a day to get onto looking at patches. And if I > take them I usually don't reply (sorry). But I don't drop stuff, so if you > don't hear, please assume the patch stuck. If others raise objections > to the patch I'll usually duck it as well, but it's pretty obvious when that > happens.
Sorry, I didn't mean to be pushy. I understand that you have a lot on your plate, and I'm sure you don't drop stuff. I just wasn't sure that you noticed that that was a patch and not just a reply on this thread, since I didn't flag it as such in the subject. I just didn't want it to slip under the radar. > > I really should knock up a script to send out an email when I add a patch > to -mm. > I thought you might have had something like that already, which was another reason I thought you might have skipped this. > > I'd figure that you may have > > missed this, since the subject didn't change. So I changed the subject to > > get your attention, and I've resent this. Here's the patch to get rid of > > the the lame schedule that was in fs/jbd/commit.c. Let me know if this > > patch is appropriate. > > I'm rather aghast at all the ifdeffery and complexity in this one. But I > haven't looked at it closely yet. > I wanted to keep the wait logic out when it wasn't a problem. Basically, the problem only occurs when bit_spin_trylock is defined as an actual trylock. So I put in a define there to enable the wait queues. I didn't want to waste cycles checking the wait queue in jbd_unlock_bh_state when there would never be anything on it. Heck, I figured why even have the wait queue wasting memory if it wasn't needed. So that added the ifdeffery complexity. Thanks, -- Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
