From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752574Ab0JYHFb (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Oct 2010 03:05:31 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:52253 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751804Ab0JYHFa (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Oct 2010 03:05:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:04:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Nick Piggin cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andi Kleen , Dave Chinner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/18] fs: Introduce per-bucket inode hash locks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20101016075703.GO19147@amd> <20101016161642.GC16861@infradead.org> <20101016171213.GC3240@amd> <20101017004610.GB29677@dastard> <20101017022539.GA3317@amd> <87iq0za32l.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20101018162105.GB9571@infradead.org> <20101019070057.GA7770@amd> <20101019165044.GA13531@infradead.org> <20101024211735.GB3137@amd> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Although a sane locking macro and structure like I had, would perfectly > > allow you to switch locks in a single place just the same. > > And a locking macro/structure is better in self documenting than a > helper function which was proposed by Christoph? Independently of what data structure you folks agree on, we really do _NOT_ want to have open coded bit_spin_*lock() anywhere in the code. As I said before, aside of RT it's a basic requirement to switch bit spinlocks to real ones for lockdep debugging. Thanks, tglx