Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex

[Mike Snitzer]

On 11/7/06, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> On debugging I found out that,"dmsetup suspend <device name>" calls
> "freeze_bdev()",which locks "bd_mount_mutex" to make sure that no new mounts
> happen on bdev until thaw_bdev() is called.  This "thaw_bdev()" is getting
> called when we resume the device through "dmsetup resume <device-name>".
> Hence we have 2 processes,one of which locks "bd_mount_mutex"(dmsetup
> suspend) and another(dmsetup resume) unlocks it.

Srinivasa's description of the patch just speaks to how freeze_bdev
and thaw_bdev are used by DM but completely skips justification for
switching from mutex to semaphore.  Why is it beneficial and/or
necessary to use a semaphore instead of a mutex here?

Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/