Hi,

quoted text
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 07:31:23PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
>> + /* Initialize semaphore for freeze. */
>> + sema_init(&bdev->bd_freeze_sem, 1);
>
> The freezing process is already protected by bd_mount_sem, so I don't
> think there's need for another one.
>
[...]
quoted text
>>  down(&bdev->bd_mount_sem);
>>  sb = get_super(bdev);
>
> I think the protection against double freezes would be better done by
> using a trylock on bd_mount_sem.

bd_mount_sem can protect against only freezes and cannot protect against
unfreezes.  If multiple unfreezes run in parallel,  the multiple up() for
bd_mount_sem might occur incorrectly.

quoted text
> In fact after that it could be changed
> from a semaphore to a simple test_and_set_bit.

I will consider using test_and_set_bit.

quoted text
>>  error = -ENOTTY;
>>  break;
>> +
>> + case FIFREEZE: {
>
> This would be better to split intot a small helper ala ioctl_fibmap()
>
>> + case FITHAW: {
>
> Same here.

OK.  I will split small helper functions.

Cheers, Takashi 
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/