[Cluster-devel] [GFS2] [Patch 4/10] Get rid of sd_statfs_mutex

[Steven Whitehouse]

Hi,

On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 09:31 -0600, Bob Peterson wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 09:18 +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > You can't do gfs2_trans_add_bh under a spinlock, but there is no reason
> > why you can't just reverse the order of these two statements to fix it,
> > 
> > Steve.
> 
> Hi Steve,
> 
> If we reverse the two statements, the trans_add_bh is not protected at
> all, which I assume was the purpose of the mutex in the first place.
> I'm not sure this is buying us much anyway, so perhaps we should forget
> it.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob Peterson
> 
> 

I don't see why it needs to be "protected", I think that mutex is just a
bug in that case unless you can prove otherwise... it seems to be doing
nothing,

Steve.