search for: is_in_system_inode_array

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "is_in_system_inode_array".

2009 Jun 18
1
[PATCH] ocfs2/trivial: Wrap ocfs2_sysfile_cluster_lock_key within define.
...d-off-by: Tao Ma <tao.ma at oracle.com> --- fs/ocfs2/sysfile.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/sysfile.c b/fs/ocfs2/sysfile.c index 6f53f5e..40e5370 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/sysfile.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/sysfile.c @@ -50,7 +50,9 @@ static inline int is_in_system_inode_array(struct ocfs2_super *osb, int type, u32 slot); +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC static struct lock_class_key ocfs2_sysfile_cluster_lock_key[NUM_SYSTEM_INODES]; +#endif static inline int is_global_system_inode(int type) { -- 1.6.2.rc2.16.gf474c
2009 Jun 04
2
[PATCH 0/2] OCFS2 lockdep support
Hi, here comes the next version of OCFS2 lockdep support. I've dropped patches with fixes from the series since they were already merged. As Joel suggested, I've simplified the main patch a bit so that we don't have ifdefs around lock declarations and there are also a few other minor improvements. Honza
2009 Feb 26
1
[PATCH 0/7] OCFS2 locking fixes and lockdep annotations
Hi, the first four patches in this series fix locking problems in OCFS2 quota code (three of them can lead to potential deadlocks). The fifth patch reorders ip_alloc_sem for directories to be acquired before localalloc locks. Mark would you please merge these? The last two patches implement lockdep annotations for OCFS2 cluster locks. We annotate all the cluster locks except for special ones
2009 Jun 02
10
[PATCH 0/7] [RESEND] Fix some deadlocks in quota code and implement lockdep for cluster locks
Hi, I'm resending this patch series. It's rediffed against linux-next branch of Joel's git tree. The first four patches are obvious fixes of deadlocks in quota code and should go in as soon as possible. The other three patches implement lockdep support for OCFS2 cluster locks. So you can have a look whether the code make sence to you and possibly merge them. They should be NOP when