[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<SEZPR06MB52695564F5DE73356D0EFF06E8B72@SEZPR06MB5269.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 11:11:11 +0000
From: 李扬韬 <frank.li@...o.com>
To: "dsterba@...e.cz" <dsterba@...e.cz>
CC: "clm@...com" <clm@...com>, "josef@...icpanda.com" <josef@...icpanda.com>,
"dsterba@...e.com" <dsterba@...e.com>, "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject:
回复: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: convert to spinlock guards in btrfs_update_ioctl_balance_args()
> Please don't do the guard() conversions in fs/btrfs/, the explicit locking is the preferred style. If other subsystems use the scoped locking guards then let them do it.
OK, is there anything we can do quickly in the btrfs code currently?
Thx,
Yangtao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists