Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 20:26 -0600, Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:45:55 +0100
>> Cedric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> +/* cr_write_pipebuf - dump contents of a pipe/fifo (assume i_mutex taken) */
>>>> +static int cr_write_pipebuf(struct cr_ctx *ctx, struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct cr_hdr h;
>>>> + void *kbuf, *addr;
>>>> + int i, ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + kbuf = (void *) __get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
>>> this can sleep and inode->i_mutex is locked.
>> Generally, it is okay to perform operations that may sleep while
>> holding a mutex (not so with spinlocks, though). Unless the page
>> allocator could try to acquire the same inode->i_mutex, this code
>> should be fine, no?
>
> Sleeping inside mutexes is OK. In general, they're drop-in compatible
> with semaphore behavior.
what about the vfs_write() ?
C.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
