| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: review: minor cleanup in xfs_read locking |
| From: | Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 04 Sep 2006 01:39:39 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20060904101711.A3331169@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | SGI |
| References: | <20060904101711.A3331169@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | lachlan@xxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050920 |
Looking a little closer... you could probably do away with the extra pair of parentheses in the call to unlikely(). Nathan Scott wrote: Hi Lachlan, Could you check this for me - it just folds the second direct I/O conditional added in your recent deadlock fix back into the prior branch, which is also direct I/O specific... thanks. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: review: minor cleanup in xfs_read locking, Lachlan McIlroy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | TAKE 955302 - fix warnings, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: review: minor cleanup in xfs_read locking, Lachlan McIlroy |
| Next by Thread: | Re: review: minor cleanup in xfs_read locking, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |