| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 02/11] xfs: remove the unlock argument to xfs_buf_delwri_queue |
| From: | Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 1 Sep 2011 14:22:04 -0500 |
| Cc: | <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20110823082912.127871770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20110823082802.335389799@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110823082912.127871770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 04:28 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > We can just unlock the buffer in the caller, and the decrement of b_hold > would also be needed in the !unlock, we just never hit that case currently > given that the caller handles that case. More specifically, the only way we'd hit that case would involve an unqueued buffer (in xfs_buf_unlock()) getting queued before bt_delwrite_lock could be acquired (in xfs_buf_delwri_queue()). But that can't happen because the buffer is locked the entire time between the check in xfs_buf_unlock() and the one in xfs_buf_delwri_queue(). (Right?) > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> Looks good. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 01/11] xfs: remove delwri buffer handling from xfs_buf_iorequest, Alex Elder |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 03/11] xfs: move more delwri setup into xfs_buf_delwri_queue, Alex Elder |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 01/11] xfs: remove delwri buffer handling from xfs_buf_iorequest, Alex Elder |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 02/11] xfs: remove the unlock argument to xfs_buf_delwri_queue, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |