Re: [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v8

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 03:32:46PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> 
> I'm pretty sure that after the first call to invalidate_inodes() in
> fs/super.c's generic_shutdown_super(), we really don't need to hold
> the BKL or the superblock lock (and let the filesystems' low-level
> write_super(0 and put_super() take the lock if they really need it),
> but we probably need to take a closer look at this to make sure it's
> true for all filesystems.  (IIRC, I think Christoph was looking to
> clean up lock_super(); at least with respect to the write_super call.
> I don't know what his plans regarding the BKL and put_super(),
> though.)

Both the BKL and lock_super are not held for ->put_super anymore in
the vfs tree.  In fact in the vfs tree there are no callers of
lock_super in the VFS anymore.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/