[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160424192105.GM25498@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 20:21:05 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] __d_add(): don't drop/regain ->d_lock
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 02:09:09PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Should the above be a new __d_instantiate_locked instead of open-coding
> it?
Nope - it gets rehash mashed into it a few commits later. In principle
we could try to fish the common helper out of it and __d_instantiate()
once the dust settles, but IMO there's not much point.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists