On Mon, 4 June 2007 00:21:41 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Sunday 03 June 2007, Jörn Engel wrote: > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(compr_mutex); > > + > > It seems you define a static compre_mutex in both segment.c and in compr.c, > and always lock them both at the same time. Is that a correct observation? > Is it intentional, or an oversight on your side? Lame coding on my side. Seems to have gone lost in my notes, but this mutex should get removed and the protected memory made per-superblock. Unlike the zlib workspace it does not consume 300k, so there is no excuse for it here. Jörn -- Joern's library part 9: http://www.scl.ameslab.gov/Publications/Gus/TwelveWays.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
