[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101019035415.GA3256@amd>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:54:15 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
To: Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] fs: Reduce inode I_FREEING and factor inode
disposal
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 02:27:02PM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> I took a look at this code and was able to remove the i_lock ->
> dcache_lock nesting. To be honest, I'm not sure why I did it that way in
> the first place. The only point (now) where i_lock is used/needed is
> while checking the ceph inode flags, and that's done without holding
> dcache_lock (presumably soon to be d_lock).
Great, it was a bit nasty of ceph to add that in without documenting
it, but I guess it got past reviewers so it was up to them to ack it
or point it out.
I think we should probably enforce a rule that dcache_lock not nest
inside i_lock :) Anybody wanting to do that in future had better have
a really good reason.
> The patch is 622386be in the for-next branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sage/ceph-client.git
>
> Anyway, hope this helps!
It does, thanks.
--
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