From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Eliminate most lock_super() calls from ext4 Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 23:49:20 -0400 Message-ID: <1240717765-16572-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> Cc: Linux Kernel Developers List , Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro To: Ext4 Developers List Return-path: Received: from THUNK.ORG ([69.25.196.29]:60014 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754516AbZDZDtc (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Apr 2009 23:49:32 -0400 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 08:40:47PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > ext3/4 internal bits? Doesn't seem to be used for any journal related > activity but mostly as protection against resizing (the whole lock_super > usage in ext3/4 looks odd to me, interestingly there's none at all in > ext2. Maybe someone of the extN crowd should audit and get rid of it in > favour of a better fs-specific lock) Here are some patches which eliminate most of the lock_super() and unlock_super() calls from ext4. The last remaining calls are designed to proect against another CPU calling write_super(), which is the original intended use. If these patches work out, we can backport these patches to ext3. Comments and review appreciated; thanks!! - Ted