[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <03414cfb-1f82-0422-73e7-4e5b2479bc5e@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 15:21:01 -0800
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Peter Newman <peternewman@...gle.com>, <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
CC: <Babu.Moger@....com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <eranian@...gle.com>,
<gupasani@...gle.com>, <hpa@...or.com>, <james.morse@....com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
<skodak@...gle.com>, <tony.luck@...el.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] x86/resctrl: Factor rdtgroup lock for multi-file
ops
Hi Peter,
On 1/25/2023 2:13 AM, Peter Newman wrote:
> rdtgroup_kn_lock_live() can only release a kernfs lock for a single file
how about s/kernfs lock/kernfs reference/?
> before waiting on the rdtgroup_mutex, limiting its usefulness for
> operations on multiple files, such as rename.
>
> Factor the work needed to respectively break and unbreak active
> protection on an individual file into rdtgroup_kn_{get,put}().
>
> This should not result in any functional change.
>
"should" has been a trigger word on occasion. You can just
write "No functional change." (also in second patch).
Reinette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists