On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 06:14:10PM +0100, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> Some members of transaction_t are allowed to be read without
> any lock being held if accessed from the correct context.
> We used LockDoc's findings to determine those members.
> Each member of them is marked with a short
Does this patch look good to you either?
- Alex
On 11.02.21 18:14, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> Some members of transaction_t are allowed to be read without
> any lock being held if accessed from the correct context.
> We used LockDoc's findings to determine those members.
> Each member of them
Some members of transaction_t are allowed to be read without
any lock being held if accessed from the correct context.
We used LockDoc's findings to determine those members.
Each member of them is marked with a short comment:
"no lock needed for jbd2 thread".
Signed-off-by: Alexander Lochmann
On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 03:38:40PM +0100, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
>
>
> On 03.12.20 15:04, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 03:26:28PM +0200, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I've updated the lock documentation according to our finding for
> > >
On 03.12.20 15:04, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 03:26:28PM +0200, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
Hi folks,
I've updated the lock documentation according to our finding for
transaction_t.
Does this patch look good to you?
I updated the annotations to match with the local
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 03:26:28PM +0200, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've updated the lock documentation according to our finding for
> transaction_t.
> Does this patch look good to you?
I updated the annotations to match with the local usage, e.g:
* When commit was
Hi folks,
I've updated the lock documentation according to our finding for
transaction_t.
Does this patch look good to you?
Cheers,
Alex
commit 13ac907c45c5da7d691f6e10972de5e56e0072c6
Author: Alexander Lochmann
Date: Thu Oct 15 15:24:52 2020 +0200
Updated locking documentation for
Hi Ted,
Have you had the chance to review the most recent version of the patch?
Does it look reasonable to you?
Cheers,
Alex
On 08.04.19 10:35, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> We used LockDoc to derive locking rules for each member
> of struct transaction_t.
> Based on those results, we extended
We used LockDoc to derive locking rules for each member
of struct transaction_t.
Based on those results, we extended the existing documentation
by more members of struct transaction_t, and updated the existing
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Lochmann
Signed-off-by: Horst Schirmeier
---
9 matches
Mail list logo
