Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261566AbVCRKj2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:39:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261573AbVCRKj2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:39:28 -0500 Received: from [24.24.2.55] ([24.24.2.55]:50616 "EHLO ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261566AbVCRKjT (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:39:19 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:38:52 -0500 (EST) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@localhost.localdomain Reply-To: rostedt@goodmis.org To: Andrew Morton cc: mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove lame schedule in journal inverted_lock (was: Re: [patch 0/3] j_state_lock, j_list_lock, remove-bitlocks) In-Reply-To: <20050318013251.330e4d78.akpm@osdl.org> Message-ID: References: <20050315120053.GA4686@elte.hu> <20050315133540.GB4686@elte.hu> <20050316085029.GA11414@elte.hu> <20050316011510.2a3bdfdb.akpm@osdl.org> <20050316095155.GA15080@elte.hu> <20050316020408.434cc620.akpm@osdl.org> <20050316101906.GA17328@elte.hu> <20050316024022.6d5c4706.akpm@osdl.org> <20050316031909.08e6cab7.akpm@osdl.org> <20050316131521.48b1354e.akpm@osdl.org> <20050318013251.330e4d78.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2127 Lines: 58 On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > Andrew, > > > > Since I haven't gotten a response from you, > > It sometimes takes me half a day to get onto looking at patches. And if I > take them I usually don't reply (sorry). But I don't drop stuff, so if you > don't hear, please assume the patch stuck. If others raise objections > to the patch I'll usually duck it as well, but it's pretty obvious when that > happens. Sorry, I didn't mean to be pushy. I understand that you have a lot on your plate, and I'm sure you don't drop stuff. I just wasn't sure that you noticed that that was a patch and not just a reply on this thread, since I didn't flag it as such in the subject. I just didn't want it to slip under the radar. > > I really should knock up a script to send out an email when I add a patch > to -mm. > I thought you might have had something like that already, which was another reason I thought you might have skipped this. > > I'd figure that you may have > > missed this, since the subject didn't change. So I changed the subject to > > get your attention, and I've resent this. Here's the patch to get rid of > > the the lame schedule that was in fs/jbd/commit.c. Let me know if this > > patch is appropriate. > > I'm rather aghast at all the ifdeffery and complexity in this one. But I > haven't looked at it closely yet. > I wanted to keep the wait logic out when it wasn't a problem. Basically, the problem only occurs when bit_spin_trylock is defined as an actual trylock. So I put in a define there to enable the wait queues. I didn't want to waste cycles checking the wait queue in jbd_unlock_bh_state when there would never be anything on it. Heck, I figured why even have the wait queue wasting memory if it wasn't needed. So that added the ifdeffery complexity. Thanks, -- Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/