Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Jun 1999 10:54:20 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: parallel writes to the same file, 2.3.7 |
| |
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > hm, i thought we want to protect preallocated blocks and other 'on the > fly' nonpersistent inode-metadata with the inode semaphore, so we can > later on remove the big kernel lock _and_ the per-filesystem superblock > lock without worrying too much.
I thought so, yes. However, I decided that it's too large a price to pay for too little gain (the price being the deadlock on the inode semaphore in the case we want to page out).
NOTE! The low-level filesystem may choose to use the inode semaphore for that still - it's just that it's not mandated by the kernel any more, and if the low-level FS does that it had better guarantee that while the inode is locked there is no memory allocation activity that can cause a deadlock..
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |