From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dax.scot.redhat.com (sct@dax.scot.redhat.com [195.89.149.242]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24440 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:33:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 22:33:21 GMT Message-Id: <199901102233.WAA01649@dax.scot.redhat.com> From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: MM deadlock [was: Re: arca-vm-8...] In-Reply-To: <19990110145618.A32291@castle.nmd.msu.ru> References: <19990110145618.A32291@castle.nmd.msu.ru> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Savochkin Andrey Vladimirovich Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , steve@netplus.net, "Eric W. Biederman" , brent verner , "Garst R. Reese" , Kalle Andersson , Zlatko Calusic , Ben McCann , Alan Cox , bredelin@ucsd.edu, "Stephen C. Tweedie" , linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, Rik van Riel , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Hi, On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:56:18 +0300, Savochkin Andrey Vladimirovich said: > Well, doesn't semaphore recursion mean that the write atomicity > is no more guaranteed by inode's i_sem semaphore? Yes. That's OK from one point of view --- there's nothing in the specs which requires us to make writes atomic. The question is whether any filesystems rely on it internally in their implementation. --Stephen -- This is a majordomo managed list. To unsubscribe, send a message with the body 'unsubscribe linux-mm me@address' to: majordomo@kvack.org