Re: review: s/i_flags_lock/i_inner_lock/g

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 03:15:23PM +1000, Timothy Shimmin wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> As part of future plans to cache incore versions of acls
> off the inode, we want to protect its modification by a spin lock.
> Dave suggested that we use the i_flags_lock but rename it to
> reflect its more general purpose on other fields, such as "i_inner_lock".
> This patch is then basically s/i_flags_lock/i_inner_lock/g.

Not too happpy about that, as I'd rather kill this lock in it's current
form and use atomic bitops on the flags.  I'd rather use i_lock in the
Linux inode for the ACLs.