Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262639AbVDAFXR (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 00:23:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262636AbVDAFUv (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 00:20:51 -0500 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:59031 "EHLO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262644AbVDAFUI (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 00:20:08 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:19:47 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt Cc: LKML Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.41-07 Message-ID: <20050401051947.GA23990@elte.hu> References: <1112212608.3691.147.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1112218750.3691.165.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050331110330.GA24842@elte.hu> <1112273378.3691.228.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050331141040.GA2544@elte.hu> <1112290916.12543.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050331174927.GA11483@elte.hu> <1112317173.28076.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050401044307.GB22753@elte.hu> <1112332426.28076.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1112332426.28076.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1124 Lines: 25 * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > could you send me your latest patch for the bit-spin issue? My main > > issue was cleanliness, so that the patch doesnt get stuck in the -RT > > tree forever. > > I think that's the main problem. Without changing the design of the > ext3 system, I don't think there is a clean patch. The implementation > that I finally settled down with was to make the j_state and > j_journal_head locks two global locks. I had to make a few > modifications to some spots to avoid deadlocks, but this worked out > well. The problem I was worried about was this causing too much > overhead. So the ext3 buffers would have to contend with each other. I > don't have any tests to see if this had too much of an impact. yeah - i think Andrew said that a global lock at that particular place might not be that much of an issue. Ingo - 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/