lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectSuper block locking
lock_super() and unlock_super() are used very heteregeneously in the
different implementation of fs.

Some fs (like isofs, minix) read/write super block fields (such as s_dev,
s_op) _without_ taking the lock, while other always take the lock when
accessing super block members.

My question is : What is the correct attitude? Should this lock be used
for accessing every member of a super block? Is there an area of code when
you are sure you don't need to take such a lock (in the read_super()
function of a fs for example)?

Just tell me, and I will do a patch for all incorrect fs.

Regis "HPReg" Duchesne - Engineering Student at ***** ******** *****
www http://www.via.ecp.fr/~regis/
(O o) I use Linux & 3Com (1135 KB/s over 10Mb/s ethernet)
--.oOO--(_)--OOo.-----------------------------------------------------------


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.030 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site