> > The two different uses of the superblock lock are really quite > different; I don't see any particular problem with using two different > locks for the two different things. Mount and the namespace code are > not locking the same thing --- the fact that the resize code uses the > superblock lock is really a historical side-effect of the fact that we > used to use the same overloaded superblock lock in the ext2/ext3 block > allocation layers to guard bitmap access. > > At a first look, i thought about locking gdt-related data. But in a closer one, it seemed to me that we're in fact modifying a little bit more than that in the resize code. But all these modifications seem to be somehow related to the ext3 super block specific data in ext3_sb_info. My first naive approach would be adding a lock to that struct
Besides that, by doing that, we become pretty much independent of vfs locking decisions to handle ext3 data. Do you think it all make sense? -- ===================================== Glauber de Oliveira Costa IBM Linux Technology Center - Brazil [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/