From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [EXT4 set 5][PATCH 1/1] expand inode i_extra_isize to support features in larger inode Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:12:59 -0700 Message-ID: <20070713121259.20066d5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1183275482.4010.133.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070710163247.5c8bfa3f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070713020529.1486491f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1184333621.20032.85.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft To: Peter Zijlstra Return-path: Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:48675 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757492AbXGMTOc (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:14:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1184333621.20032.85.camel@twins> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:33:41 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 02:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Except lockdep doesn't know about journal_start(), which has ranking > > requirements similar to a semaphore. > > Something like so? Looks OK. > Or can journal_stop() be done by a different task than the one that did > journal_start()? - in which case nothing much can be done :-/ Yeah, journal_start() and journal_stop() are well-behaved. > This seems to boot... albeit I did not push it hard. I fear the consequences of this change :( Oh well, please keep it alive, maybe beat on it a bit, resend it later on?