On Tue 09-06-09 01:50:49, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 03:14:20PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 10:13:57PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > I think i both the case Jan's patch > > > allocate-blocks-correctly-with-subpage-blocksize need an update ? Since you have put > > > the patch before Jan's changes. > > > > OK, here's how I updated Jan's patch. I'm going to assume that we'll > > submit the ext4 patch queue immediately as soon as the merge window > > opens, since my impression is Jan is still waiting for some mm > > developers to review his patch set. > > > > Annesh, does this look good to you? > > I just did a quick look. Should we do a block_unlock_hole_extend after > journal_stop. We do a block_lock_hole_extend before journal_start. Well, it's not really necessary (and it was not like that in my original patch). You just have to do it after i_size has been updated and the function just needs to acquire inode_lock spinlock so there's no risk of deadlock anywhere... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
