On Mon 14-05-12 12:40:45, Marco Stornelli wrote: > 2012/5/14 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>: > > On Sun 13-05-12 15:44:33, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > >> AFFS code preallocates several blocks as an optimisation. Unfortunately > >> it's not protected by lock so the same blocks may end up allocated twice. > >> Here is a fix. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@xxxxxxxxx> > > The patch looks good to me now. Thanks! You can add: > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > > > Al, will you merge this patch through your tree? AFFS does not seem to > > have a maintainer so you are a default fallback... > > > > Honza > > > > I don't know the AFFS code, so only a question. Instead to use a spin > lock, I think we can use a simple mutex. Or is the spin lock > mandatory? So what would be an advantage of a mutex? Spinlock *is* the simple locking variant... 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
