xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove unused locking flags

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove unused locking flags
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 21:11:03 +0400
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=KsyLOKzcUrfFl79mf6MTwvy+BnqvTRoCstdpmMcnOj+dpGD/eDgkgCHA/yUM3SjNsw7pwwB7TDpquVFBA2K+sh96ZyrMYxJr7H8FWXv2IApw7vjAH5C4xwpx7oS0dmMGLN5pjXomkSB9+OC73crVVZrxR1eKMuVchcqMFJre/7c=
In-reply-to: <20060709105454.D1640104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20060708215324.GA7522@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060709105454.D1640104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 10:54:54AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 01:53:24AM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> NACK.  These macros get used by other SGI code (not merged in mainline).
> Their presence here has zero runtime cost, and keeps merges simpler for
> me, so they need to stay.

In this case, yes, runtime overhead in nil.

What about passing dummy credentials? What about DMAPI stubbed to errors
since XFS hit mainline (at least 900 lines which can be removed)? They
have runtime overhead.

I can add "behavoir chains" here but patch for dealing with them doesn't
exists yet, so I won't.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>