| To: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: remove i_iolock and use i_rwsem in the VFS inode instead |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 12 Aug 2016 04:50:26 +0200 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20160811234335.GX16044@dastard> |
| References: | <1470935423-12329-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20160811234335.GX16044@dastard> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 09:43:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > Regardless, if the rwsem code can be made to check for exclusive or > shared locking, we can get rid of the mrlock abstraction. Can we do > that first, Christoph, then make this lock change? I was going to do that next, but if you want the patch order switched around I can do that as well. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Fw: feed/fertilizer/grain/sugar packing and weighing program, export03@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCHv2 xfsprogs 13/14] xfs.h: require transparent LFS, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: remove i_iolock and use i_rwsem in the VFS inode instead, Dave Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: remove i_iolock and use i_rwsem in the VFS inode instead, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |