On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:41 AM, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:23:44PM -0600, Trenton D. Adams wrote: >> >> I was trying to imply that the patch might fix the problem I saw, not >> that it was the cause. I only though that because it mentioned a >> potential deadlock, and it seems like that is what the problem I saw >> was. > > > Ah ok. No it's part of a tree which reworks the reiserfs locking scheme > by removing the old one based on the legacy and obsolete bkl (big kernel > lock). In this tree I had to fix several deadlocks or at least unsafe > lock states because the bkl is converted into a mutex and some new lock > dependencies were borned after that. But these issues had nothing > to deal with upstream problems. > > BTW, would you be interested in giving a try with this reiserfs bkl > removal tree? I really lack testing and feedbacks from users. Well, the problem is that I only use reiserfs on my usb stick at the moment. So, the amount of testing I could do would be minimal at the moment. However, if I change my local filesystems to reiserfs, I will remember to check back here for your patch. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
