1. 25 9月, 2012 1 次提交
  2. 14 7月, 2012 6 次提交
  3. 04 5月, 2012 1 次提交
  4. 28 3月, 2012 1 次提交
  5. 04 1月, 2012 3 次提交
  6. 29 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  7. 13 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  8. 19 8月, 2011 1 次提交
  9. 01 8月, 2011 1 次提交
    • J
      cifs: simplify refcounting for oplock breaks · ad635942
      Jeff Layton 提交于
      Currently, we take a sb->s_active reference and a cifsFileInfo reference
      when an oplock break workqueue job is queued. This is unnecessary and
      more complicated than it needs to be. Also as Al points out,
      deactivate_super has non-trivial locking implications so it's best to
      avoid that if we can.
      
      Instead, just cancel any pending oplock breaks for this filehandle
      synchronously in cifsFileInfo_put after taking it off the lists.
      That should ensure that this job doesn't outlive the structures it
      depends on.
      Reported-by: NAl Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
      Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
      Signed-off-by: NSteve French <sfrench@us.ibm.com>
      ad635942
  10. 21 7月, 2011 1 次提交
    • J
      fs: push i_mutex and filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers · 02c24a82
      Josef Bacik 提交于
      Btrfs needs to be able to control how filemap_write_and_wait_range() is called
      in fsync to make it less of a painful operation, so push down taking i_mutex and
      the calling of filemap_write_and_wait() down into the ->fsync() handlers.  Some
      file systems can drop taking the i_mutex altogether it seems, like ext3 and
      ocfs2.  For correctness sake I just pushed everything down in all cases to make
      sure that we keep the current behavior the same for everybody, and then each
      individual fs maintainer can make up their mind about what to do from there.
      Thanks,
      Acked-by: NJan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
      Signed-off-by: NJosef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
      Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
      02c24a82
  11. 13 7月, 2011 1 次提交
  12. 15 6月, 2011 1 次提交
  13. 19 5月, 2011 5 次提交
  14. 22 2月, 2011 1 次提交
  15. 01 2月, 2011 1 次提交
  16. 26 1月, 2011 1 次提交
  17. 21 1月, 2011 3 次提交
  18. 20 1月, 2011 1 次提交
  19. 16 1月, 2011 1 次提交
  20. 25 10月, 2010 1 次提交
  21. 18 10月, 2010 1 次提交
  22. 13 10月, 2010 1 次提交
    • J
      cifs: don't use vfsmount to pin superblock for oplock breaks · d7c86ff8
      Jeff Layton 提交于
      Filesystems aren't really supposed to do anything with a vfsmount. It's
      considered a layering violation since vfsmounts are entirely managed at
      the VFS layer.
      
      CIFS currently keeps an active reference to a vfsmount in order to
      prevent the superblock vanishing before an oplock break has completed.
      What we really want to do instead is to keep sb->s_active high until the
      oplock break has completed. This patch borrows the scheme that NFS uses
      for handling sillyrenames.
      
      An atomic_t is added to the cifs_sb_info. When it transitions from 0 to
      1, an extra reference to the superblock is taken (by bumping the
      s_active value). When it transitions from 1 to 0, that reference is
      dropped and a the superblock teardown may proceed if there are no more
      references to it.
      
      Also, the vfsmount pointer is removed from cifsFileInfo and from
      cifs_new_fileinfo, and some bogus forward declarations are removed from
      cifsfs.h.
      Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
      Reviewed-by: NSuresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@suse.de>
      Acked-by: NDave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NSteve French <sfrench@us.ibm.com>
      d7c86ff8
  23. 08 10月, 2010 1 次提交
  24. 02 8月, 2010 1 次提交
  25. 28 5月, 2010 1 次提交
  26. 27 4月, 2010 1 次提交
  27. 21 4月, 2010 1 次提交