On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 21:12:40 -0600
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:47:28 +1100Is a semaphore any worse than the current mutex in this respect? At least unlocking from another thread doesn't violate semaphore rules. :)
David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:40:54AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:Seems not. I think people were hoping that various nasties in thereSami Farin wrote:Seems like it. Andrew, did this ever get queued for merge?On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 08:37:34 +1100, David Chinner wrote:Hm, it was proposed upstream a while ago:
...
Looked like it =)fstab was there just fine after -u.Oh, that still hasn't been fixed?
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/27/137
I guess it got lost?
would go away. We return to userspace with a kernel lock held??
I assume that if we weren't returning to userspace with a lock held, this
mutex problem would simply go away.