[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHc6FU708-F-C_ihwBW-zKC7rZvfeuKYq7kTccZQU156UicjQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 18:52:34 +0200
From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: cluster-devel <cluster-devel@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Tom Herbert <tom@...ntonium.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] gfs2: Stop using rhashtable_walk_peek
On 29 March 2018 at 17:41, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 03:15:54PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>>
>> For all I know, Neil's latest plan is to get rhashtable_walk_peek
>> replaced and removed because it is unfixable. This patch removes the
>> one and only user.
>
> His latest patch makes rhashtable_walk_peek stable in the face of
> removals.
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/892534/
Ok, I can slightly update my patch description. The problem still
remains that glocks can be deleted from the rhashtable between
stop/start, and that needs to be fixed in gfs2. Once that's done,
keeping track of the current glock comes for free and we won't need
rhashtable_walk_peek anymore.
Should rhashtable_walk_peek be kept around even if there are no more
users? I have my doubts.
Thanks,
Andreas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists