Marco Gerards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Fatfs still has serious locking problems write writing and I had a
> close look at this today.
>
> First I need to separate the problem into sub-problems:
>
> -- The diskfs_node_refcnt_lock problem --
>
> diskfs_node_refcnt_lock can be locked
Hi,
Fatfs still has serious locking problems write writing and I had a
close look at this today.
First I need to separate the problem into sub-problems:
-- The diskfs_node_refcnt_lock problem --
diskfs_node_refcnt_lock can be locked while write_node tries to lock
it.
The problem that is (perha
On Sunday 14 April 2002 03:35, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It seems reasonable to me to leave it up to the filesystem-specific code
> > to decide what nodes it might need to lock, and just give it enough
> > information to avoid deadlock. I have in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> FAT doesn't have inodes, so fatfs has to lock the node of the
> directory that contains the node for which diskfs_cached_lookup is
> called.
This is the root misconception. FAT *does* have inodes. What it
doesn't have is *disk inodes*. Or rather, it *does* have di
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems reasonable to me to leave it up to the filesystem-specific code to
> decide what nodes it might need to lock, and just give it enough
> information to avoid deadlock. I have in my tree a slightly different
> change that adds a struct node * a
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It occurs to me that without this change, if a directory in a ufs or ext2fs
> filesystem contains a link to itself by a name other than "..", then a
> lookup of that name will deadlock the directory node. (That is probably an
> invalid state that fsck
On Monday 01 April 2002 02:17, you wrote:
> It seems reasonable to me to leave it up to the filesystem-specific code to
> decide what nodes it might need to lock, and just give it enough
> information to avoid deadlock. I have in my tree a slightly different
> change that adds a struct node * arg
It seems reasonable to me to leave it up to the filesystem-specific code to
decide what nodes it might need to lock, and just give it enough
information to avoid deadlock. I have in my tree a slightly different
change that adds a struct node * argument to diskfs_cached_lookup instead
of a flag, i
Hi,
Currently I'm working on fatfs and I ran into a little problem:
FAT doesn't have inodes, so fatfs has to lock the node of the
directory that contains the node for which diskfs_cached_lookup is
called. diskfs_cached_lookup is called by diskfs, before that call the
directory node is locked or
