Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Aug 2005 08:08:15 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-01 |
| |
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> So, the only other solutions that I can think of is: > > a) add yet another (bloat) lock to the buffer head. > > b) Still use your b_update_lock for the jbd_lock_bh_journal_head and > change the jbd_lock_bh_state to what I discussed earlier, and that > being the hash wait_on_bit code.
could you try a), how clean does it get? Personally i'm much more in favor of cleanliness. On the vanilla kernel a spinlock is zero bytes on UP [the most RAM-sensitive platform], and it's a word on typical SMP.
Ingo - 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/
| |