[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101216153634.GA24185@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 10:36:34 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: xfs@....sgi.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfs: use generic per-cpu counter infrastructure
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:21:52PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
>
> XFS has a per-cpu counter implementation for in-core superblock
> counters that pre-dated the generic implementation. It is complex
> and baroque as it is tailored directly to the needs of ENOSPC
> detection.
>
> Now that the generic percpu counter infrastructure has the
> percpu_counter_add_unless_lt() function that implements the
> necessary threshold checks for us, switch the XFS per-cpu
> superblock counters to use the generic percpu counter
> infrastructure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
Looks good to me,
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
A little nipick:
> -#ifdef HAVE_PERCPU_SB
> ASSERT(field < XFS_SBS_ICOUNT || field > XFS_SBS_FDBLOCKS);
> -#endif
No need to keep this assert - xfs_mod_incore_sb_unlocked already
has one for unknown fields.
--
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