[Top] [All Lists]

Re: review: s/i_flags_lock/i_inner_lock/g

To: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: review: s/i_flags_lock/i_inner_lock/g
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:37:57 -0400
Cc: xfs-dev <xfs-dev@xxxxxxx>, xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4816AEEB.8090907@xxxxxxx>
References: <4816AEEB.8090907@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
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.

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