Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261508AbVDJPG5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:06:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261509AbVDJPG5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:06:57 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-04.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.58]:46548 "EHLO ms-smtp-04.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261508AbVDJPGu (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:06:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.41-07 From: Steven Rostedt To: Ingo Molnar Cc: LKML In-Reply-To: <20050410103134.GA6234@elte.hu> References: <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> <20050401051947.GA23990@elte.hu> <1112358445.28076.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1112908910.22577.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050410103134.GA6234@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Kihon Technologies Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:06:45 -0400 Message-Id: <1113145605.20980.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1177 Lines: 25 On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 12:31 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > looks much cleaner than earlier ones. Would it be possible to make the > locks per journal? [...] I've already looked into doing this, but it would be much more intrusive to implement. The problem lies where these locks are called with only the buffer head as a reference. The locks are used to attach or detach the buffer head from a journal or just see if it is already attached. So having the lock with the journal is difficult since you need to take the lock sometimes before you know which journal is needed. I'm sure this is possible but it will need modifying the code where the locks are called instead of just replacing the contents of the lock function. Maybe with the help of Stephen Tweedie, this can be done. But what I gave you was the cleanest and most reliable solution currently, without changing anything but the functions to take the locks. -- 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/