lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/6] nfs: "open code" the NFS direct write rescheduler
Chuck Lever <cel@citi.umich.edu> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Chuck Lever <cel@netapp.com> wrote:
> >> + * Prevent I/O completion while we're still rescheduling
> >> + */
> >> + dreq->outstanding++;
> >> +
> >
> > No locking.
> >
> >> dreq->count = 0;
> >> + list_for_each(pos, &dreq->rewrite_list) {
> >> + struct nfs_write_data *data =
> >> + list_entry(dreq->rewrite_list.next, struct nfs_write_data, pages);
> >> +
> >> + spin_lock(&dreq->lock);
> >> + dreq->outstanding++;
> >> + spin_unlock(&dreq->lock);
> >
> > Locking.
> >
> > Deliberate?
>
> Yes. At the top of the loop, there is no outstanding I/O, so no locking
> is needed while updating "outstanding." Inside the loop, we've
> dispatched some I/O against "dreq" so locking is needed to ensure
> outstanding is updated properly.
>

OK. Well if I asked, then others will wonder about it. A comment would
cure that problem ;)
-
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: 2006-05-19 20:45    [W:1.481 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site