[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YGc642aVrbAN77rT@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 11:40:19 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Alexander Lochmann <alexander.lochmann@...dortmund.de>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Horst Schirmeier <horst.schirmeier@...dortmund.de>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Updated locking documentation for journal_t
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:51:55AM +0100, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
> Some members of transaction_t are allowed to be read without
> any lock being held if consistency doesn't matter.
> Based on LockDoc's findings, we extended the locking
> documentation of those members.
> Each one of them is marked with a short comment:
> "no lock for quick racy checks".
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Lochmann <alexander.lochmann@...dortmund.de>
> Signed-off-by: Horst Schirmeier <horst.schirmeier@...dortmund.de>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Thanks, applied. I had to fix up the patch, which was mailer-damaged,
and I also reflowed the comments.
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists