> On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 05:05, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > ext3_mark_recovery_complete() doesn't do that. > > No, but in this case we have already mounted the fs readonly, so we > shouldn't be getting new transactions; and journal_flush _does_ deal > with waiting for old transactions to complete. > > Hmm. ext3_remount does set MS_RDONLY before we get this far, but it is > probably still possible for us to race here. > > Al, what is there to stop an open(O_RDWR) from racing against a > do_remount(MS_RDONLY)? > > --Stephen Hi Stephen, I'm sorry to pester you but I haven't heard any more about this issue, and in the mean time it's still causing us problems. Has there been any progress on it? Cheers, Chris. -- ___ __ _ / __// / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson -- UNIX Firewall Lead Developer | / (_ / ,\/ _/ /_ \ | NetServers.co.uk http://www.netservers.co.uk | \ _//_/_/_//_/___/ | 21 Signet Court, Cambridge, UK. 01223 576516 | _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
