Re: RT, what to do about up/down_read_non_owner()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 11:50:04AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> (CCs Al, who knows, maybe he'll make them go *poof*)
> 
> > > > In v4.7, Al added those buggers to NFS.  BCACHE is disabled in RT
> > > > because of same.. but that's a somewhat suboptimal solution for
> > > > something as widely used as NFS.
> > > > 
> > > > Suggestions?  I reverted the offending commit to get 4.7-rt up and
> > > > running, but that's not gonna fly long term.
> > > 
> > > This API should be avoided according to the comment and completions
> > > should be used. I am for removal of those. Were the locking people okay
> > > with this change in the first place or did this just sneak in?
> > 
> > It just snuck in.  Al reworked sillyunlink, whacking the wait_event()
> > stuff that was there, using annoying $subject instead.

It's more than just wait_event() crap being killed (and crap it certainly
was).  The situation is pretty much the same as with bcache; we don't want
readers to stick around until the initiated action has been completed.

What exactly is RT problem, just to be sure to avoid reproducing exact same
issue in the replacement?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [RT Stable]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux