Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "num_heads_ready".
Did you mean:
num_heads_ready++
2013 Jan 31
1
[PATCH] Btrfs: fix freeing delayed ref head while still holding its mutex V2
...->refs, 1);
if (btrfs_delayed_ref_is_head(ref)) {
- struct btrfs_delayed_ref_head *head;
head = btrfs_delayed_node_to_head(ref);
if (!mutex_trylock(&head->mutex)) {
@@ -3641,10 +3641,12 @@ int btrfs_destroy_delayed_refs(struct btrfs_transaction *trans,
delayed_refs->num_heads_ready--;
list_del_init(&head->cluster);
}
+
ref->in_tree = 0;
rb_erase(&ref->rb_node, &delayed_refs->root);
delayed_refs->num_entries--;
-
+ if (head)
+ mutex_unlock(&head->mutex);
spin_unlock(&delayed_refs->lock);
btrfs_put_delayed_ref(re...
2011 Jul 01
2
Re: [btrfs-transacti] & btrfs-endio-wri] - WAS: Re: [btrfs-delalloc-]
On 06/30/2011 09:13 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 10:12 AM, Proskurin Kirill wrote:
>> On 06/29/2011 08:14 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>>> Ok - I upgrade to 2.6.39-2 but it is seems to all things get worse.
>>>> Now I see [btrfs-transacti]& btrfs-endio-wri] 80-100% all the
time and
>>>> io performance looks like lower then before.