| /openbmc/linux/fs/reiserfs/ |
| H A D | lock.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | prints.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | resize.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | fix_node.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | reiserfs.h | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | dir.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | ioctl.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | bitmap.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | stree.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | namei.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | journal.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | inode.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|
| H A D | super.c | 278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
278f6679 Thu Aug 08 16:34:46 CDT 2013 Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com> reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
The reiserfs write lock replaced the BKL and uses similar semantics.
Frederic's locking code makes a distinction between when the lock is nested
and when it's being acquired/released, but I don't think that's the right
distinction to make.
The right distinction is between the lock being released at end-of-use and
the lock being released for a schedule. The unlock should return the depth
and the lock should restore it, rather than the other way around as it is now.
This patch implements that and adds a number of places where the lock
should be dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
|