Re: [PATCH resend] introduce I_SYNC

[JÃrn Engel]

On Thu, 31 May 2007 15:46:48 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> > I_LOCK was used for several unrelated purposes, which caused deadlock
> > situations in certain filesystems as a side effect.  One of the purposes
> > now uses the new I_SYNC bit.
> 
> Do we know what those deadlocks were?  It's a bit of a mystery patch otherwise.
> 
> Put yourself in the position of random-distro-engineer wondering "should I
> backport this?".

The logfs deadlock is well-known.  All others are very handwavy and may
or may not really exist.

Will resend with description and without the jfs comment.

> > Also document the various bits and change their order from historical to
> > logical.
> 
> What a nice comment you added ;)

And now I know how to bribe you into accepting patches. ;)

JÃrn

-- 
Unless something dramatically changes, by 2015 we'll be largely
wondering what all the fuss surrounding Linux was really about.
-- Rob Enderle
-
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/