| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: remove i_iolock and use i_rwsem in the VFS inode instead |
| From: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 12 Aug 2016 19:58:13 +1000 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20160812025026.GA975@xxxxxx> |
| References: | <1470935423-12329-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20160811234335.GX16044@dastard> <20160812025026.GA975@xxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 04:50:26AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > 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. Yeah, I'd prefer we remove te abstraction first, then switch to the vfs inode lock. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | JENTAI---Professional Manufactory in Hot melt glue sticks and Hot melt colloidal particles, åéå |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | PCB:support the electrict world----xfs, hongmypcb5@xxxxxxx |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: remove i_iolock and use i_rwsem in the VFS inode instead, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH 0/5] fix log recovery for v5 superblocks, Brian Foster |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |