Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Patch\]\s+Per\s+iclog\s+callback\s+chain\s+lock\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Patch\]\s+Per\s+iclog\s+callback\s+chain\s+lock\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:13:48 +1000; Introduce an iclog callback chain lock. Rather than use the icloglock for protecting the iclog completion callback chain, use a new per-iclog lock so that walking the callback chain doesn't require h; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00010.html (16,029 bytes)
2. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:24:06 +1000; This is not accurate - the callback chain is removed in bulk then walked without the lock, but will loop over the iclog chain in case callbacks were added while processing the chain (not sure if that; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00011.html (8,738 bytes)
3. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:09:31 +1000; Looks fine to me - just one small comment. David Chinner wrote: Introduce an iclog callback chain lock. Rather than use the icloglock for protecting the iclog completion callback chain, use a new per; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00018.html (16,223 bytes)
4. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:39:41 +1000; ..... I added it just to be explicit. It's not actually needed as we kmem_zalloc() the log structure.... .... Yup - it's a new lock, so we can make whatever rules we like ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chi; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00020.html (9,364 bytes)
5. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:19:03 +1000; David Chinner wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:09:31PM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote: Looks fine to me - just one small comment. ..... @@ -1257,6 +1255,8 @@ xlog_alloc_log(xfs_mount_t *mp, iclog->ic_; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00022.html (10,708 bytes)
6. og_ticket allocator (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 08:51:11 -0400; == -- linux-2.6-xfs.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_vno; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00104.html (7,999 bytes)
7. et component length (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 08:17:28 +1000; , the log of your test (complete output) on working and non-wor; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00115.html (8,777 bytes)
8. writing what was sent in other threads) (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:13:48 +1000; the xlog_ticket allocator The ticket allocator is just a simple slab implementation internal to the log. It requires the icloglock to be held when manipulating it and this contributes to conte; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00606.html (16,029 bytes)
9. ) (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:24:06 +1000; y should update XFS_MOUNT_ATTR2 here, not later. i.e. before we mount he log and start recovery. Rather than here. Yep, makes sense. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Austra; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00607.html (8,738 bytes)
10. inode generation number initialisation (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:09:31 +1000; e: The comment for XFS_DQUOT_LOGRES states that we need to reserve space for 3 dquots. I can't figure out why we n; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00614.html (16,223 bytes)
11. rove XFS error checking and propagation (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:39:41 +1000; fine to me - just one small comment. David Chinner wrote: Introduce an iclog callback chain lock. Rather than use the icloglock for protecting the iclog completion callback chain, use a new per; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00616.html (9,364 bytes)
12. rove XFS error checking and propagation (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:19:03 +1000; added it just to be explicit. It's not actually needed as we kmem_zalloc() the log structure.... .... Yup - it's a new lock, so we can make whatever rules we like ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chi; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00618.html (10,708 bytes)
13. t component length (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 08:51:11 -0400; patch series) --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00700.html (7,999 bytes)
14. (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 08:17:28 +1000; a chance to check in yet. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg00711.html (8,777 bytes)
15. [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:13:48 +1000; Introduce an iclog callback chain lock. Rather than use the icloglock for protecting the iclog completion callback chain, use a new per-iclog lock so that walking the callback chain doesn't require h; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01202.html (16,029 bytes)
16. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:24:06 +1000; This is not accurate - the callback chain is removed in bulk then walked without the lock, but will loop over the iclog chain in case callbacks were added while processing the chain (not sure if that; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01203.html (8,806 bytes)
17. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:09:31 +1000; Looks fine to me - just one small comment. Rather than use the icloglock for protecting the iclog completion callback chain, use a new per-iclog lock so that walking the callback chain doesn't requir; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01210.html (17,958 bytes)
18. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:39:41 +1000; ..... I added it just to be explicit. It's not actually needed as we kmem_zalloc() the log structure.... .... Yup - it's a new lock, so we can make whatever rules we like ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chi; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01212.html (9,446 bytes)
19. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:19:03 +1000; David Chinner wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:09:31PM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote: Looks fine to me - just one small comment. ..... @@ -1257,6 +1255,8 @@ xlog_alloc_log(xfs_mount_t *mp, iclog->ic_; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01214.html (10,952 bytes)
20. Re: [Patch] Per iclog callback chain lock (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 08:51:11 -0400; Looks good. You might want to kill ic_callback_tail while you're at it as it's a write-only struct member.; /archives/xfs/2008-04/msg01296.html (8,067 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]