void (*put_super) (struct super_block *);
void (*write_super) (struct super_block *);
int (*sync_fs)(struct super_block *sb, int wait);
- void (*write_super_lockfs) (struct super_block *);
- void (*unlockfs) (struct super_block *);
+ int (*freeze_fs) (struct super_block *);
+ int (*unfreeze_fs) (struct super_block *);
int (*statfs) (struct dentry *, struct kstatfs *);
int (*remount_fs) (struct super_block *, int *, char *);
void (*clear_inode) (struct inode *);
put_super: yes yes no
write_super: no yes read
sync_fs: no no read
-write_super_lockfs: ?
-unlockfs: ?
+freeze_fs: ?
+unfreeze_fs: ?
statfs: no no no
remount_fs: yes yes maybe (see below)
clear_inode: no
can and should be done using the internal locking with smaller critical areas).
Current worst offender is ext2_get_block()...
-->fasync() is a mess. This area needs a big cleanup and that will probably
-affect locking.
+->fasync() is called without BKL protection, and is responsible for
+maintaining the FASYNC bit in filp->f_flags. Most instances call
+fasync_helper(), which does that maintenance, so it's not normally
+something one needs to worry about. Return values > 0 will be mapped to
+zero in the VFS layer.
->readdir() and ->ioctl() on directories must be changed. Ideally we would
move ->readdir() to inode_operations and use a separate method for directory