Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:39:48 -0700 | From | Andreas Dilger <> | Subject | Re: [Ext2-devel] [PATCH] concurrent block allocation for ext2 against 2.5.64 |
| |
On Mar 13, 2003 11:55 +0300, Alex Tomas wrote: > as Andrew said, concurrent balloc for ext3 is useless because of BKL. > and I saw it in benchmarks. but it may be useful for ext2.
Sadly, we are constantly diverging the ext2/ext3 codebases. Lots of features are going into ext3, but lots of fixes/improvements are only going into ext2. Is ext3 holding BKL for doing journal_start() still?
Looking at ext3_prepare_write() we grab the BKL for doing journal_start() and for journal_stop(), but I don't _think_ we need BKL for journal_stop() do we? We may or may not need it for the journal_data case, but that is not even working right now I think.
It also seems we are getting BKL in ext3_truncate(), which likely isn't needed past journal_start(), although we do need to have superblock-only lock for ext3_orphan_add/del.
Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/ http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
- 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/
| |