[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808011115050.3277@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 11:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
cc: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Arthur Jones <ajones@...erbed.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] md bug fixes and minor improvements
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
> + spin_lock_irq(&bitmap->mddev->queue->queue_lock);
> blk_plug_device(bitmap->mddev->queue);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&bitmap->mddev->queue->queue_lock);
Can we please not have a chain of three dereferences in a row like that?
That's an almost certain sign that we should either have a helper function
or just a variable, and do it as
queue = bitmap->mddev->queue;
spin_lock_irq(&queue->queue_lock);
blk_plug_device(queue);
spin_unlock_irq(&queue->queue_lock);
Hmm? Perhaps the helper function is cleaner, ie
static inline blk_plug_device_unlocked(struct request_queue * queue)
{..
instead. That, of course, would have to use spin_lock_irqsave().
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists