This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
RE : Is JFFS2 thread-safe?
- From: "Vincent Catros" <Vincent dot Catros at elios-informatique dot fr>
- To: "'David Woodhouse'" <dwmw2 at infradead dot org>
- Cc: <ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:15:32 +0100
- Subject: [ECOS] RE : [ECOS] Is JFFS2 thread-safe?
Hello David,
And thank you for your answer.
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De?: David Woodhouse [mailto:dwmw2@infradead.org]
> Envoyé?: jeudi 27 novembre 2003 01:27
> À?: Vincent Catros
> Cc?: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
> Objet?: Re: [ECOS] Is JFFS2 thread-safe?
>
[...]
> The core JFFS2 code is thread safe, assuming the Linux semaphore and
> spinlock primitives are correctly translated into eCos mutexes and
> preemption blocks. The bit that I haven't paid much attention to
w.r.t.
> locking is the inode cache handling in fs-ecos.c.
>
> In fact, I suspect that is actually OK because we set the
> CYG_SYNCMODE_FILE_FILESYSTEM flag and hence the fileio layer ensures
> that only one file system method is invoked at a time. It would be
> better to do our own locking and drop that flag though, since it makes
> coordinating the locking with gcthread.c a little nicer.
[...]
If I understand, JFFS2 should be thread safe, but this has never been
tested since multual access is avoided by fileio layer when using
CYG_SYNCMODE_FILE_FILESYSTEM flag?
Am I wrong?
Regards.
Vincent
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss