lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 18 Mar 2005 01:58:36 -0500 (EST)
FromSteven Rostedt <>
SubjectRe: [patch 0/3] j_state_lock, j_list_lock, remove-bitlocks

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
>
> OK, no need to cc: me on this one any more.  It's really low priority
> IMO compared to the big latencies I am seeing with ext3 and
> "data=ordered".  Unless you think there is any relation.
>

IMO a deadlock is higher priority than a big latency :-)

I still belive that something to do with the locking in ext3 has to do
with your latencies, but I'll take you off when I send something to Andrew
or Ingo next time. Hopefully, they'll do the same.

When this problem is solved on Ingo's side, maybe this will solve your
latency problem, so I recommend that you keep trying the latest RT
kernels.  BTW what test are you running that causes these latencies?

-- Steve

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2008