lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree
Hey Neil;

it looks like its one of your patches isn't it?

http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44100.html
http://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg44101.html

Given that I can't find them in a lkml archive means nobody's ever seen
those patches.

Anyway; has that 3/3 patch ever been ran with lockdep enabled?

Stuff like:

+ for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
+ spin_lock_init(conf->hash_locks + i);

And:

+static void __lock_all_hash_locks(struct r5conf *conf)
+{
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_STRIPE_HASH_LOCKS; i++)
+ spin_lock(conf->hash_locks + i);
+}

Tends to complain real loud.

This leaves one to wonder...
'fancy' locking scheme:1, validation effort:0




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-16 23:01    [W:1.801 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site