On Tue 16-11-10 13:05:44, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:40:47PM +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote: > > Replace bkl with the inode->i_alloc_sem rw semaphore in udf_release_file(), > > udf_symlink(), udf_symlink_filler(), udf_get_block() and udf_block_map(). > > Add protection in udf_evict_inode() using the same i_alloc_sem rw semaphore. > > I'd rather prefer not to introduce new users of i_alloc_sem. It's a > quite nasty beast: the only rw_semaphore that is not released by the > thread acquiring it. Thomas asked me if there's a way to get rid of it, > and I've come up with some schemes that I need to prototype. Adding > more uses that are unrelated to the original direct I/O use case are > not very helpful in doing that. OK, I didn't know this. It's no problem to replace i_alloc_sem with a private rw_semaphore so I can do that. I just thought we might as well use it when it's there and not waste more inode memory... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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
