Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 10:42:44 -0400 From: Chuck Youse <cyouse@cybersites.com> To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How stable is soft updates? Message-ID: <99041210433003.93133@ns1.cybersites.com> References: <199904101432.HAA10726@cwsys.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Probably. My guess is that this is to increase performance, as opposed to avoid a deadlock? In the former case, it's not strictly necessary, but in the latter, it's a good idea. On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > Revision 1.24, in -current, of ffs_softdep.c: > > Reorganize locking to avoid holding the lock during calls to bdwrite > and brelse (which may sleep in some systems). > > Would it be good idea to merge this into -stable? > > > Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 > Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 > Open Systems Group Internet: Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca > ITSD Cy.Schubert@gems8.gov.bc.ca > Province of BC > "e**(i*pi)+1=0" > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message -- Chuck Youse Director of Systems cyouse@cybersites.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?99041210433003.93133>