From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932352AbVIEHud (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 03:50:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932393AbVIEHuc (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 03:50:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:8388 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932352AbVIEHua (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 03:50:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:55:28 +0800 From: David Teigland To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cluster@redhat.com Subject: Re: GFS, what's remaining Message-ID: <20050905075528.GB17607@redhat.com> References: <20050901104620.GA22482@redhat.com> <1125574523.5025.10.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20050905054348.GC11337@redhat.com> <84144f02050904233274d45230@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84144f02050904233274d45230@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 09:32:59AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > +void gfs2_glock_hold(struct gfs2_glock *gl) > > > +{ > > > + glock_hold(gl); > > > +} > > > > > > eh why? > > On 9/5/05, David Teigland wrote: > > You removed the comment stating exactly why, see below. If that's not a > > accepted technique in the kernel, say so and I'll be happy to change it > > here and elsewhere. > > Is there a reason why users of gfs2_glock_hold() cannot use > glock_hold() directly? Either set could be trivially removed. It's such an insignificant issue that I've removed glock_hold and put. For the record, within glock.c we consistently paired inlined versions of: glock_hold() glock_put() we wanted external versions to be appropriately named so we had: gfs2_glock_hold() gfs2_glock_put() still not sure if that technique is acceptable in this crowd or not. Dave From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Teigland Subject: Re: GFS, what's remaining Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:55:28 +0800 Message-ID: <20050905075528.GB17607@redhat.com> References: <20050901104620.GA22482@redhat.com> <1125574523.5025.10.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20050905054348.GC11337@redhat.com> <84144f02050904233274d45230@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: linux clustering Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-cluster@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arjan van de Ven Return-path: To: Pekka Enberg Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84144f02050904233274d45230@mail.gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-cluster-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-cluster-bounces@redhat.com List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 09:32:59AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 01:35:23PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > +void gfs2_glock_hold(struct gfs2_glock *gl) > > > +{ > > > + glock_hold(gl); > > > +} > > > > > > eh why? > > On 9/5/05, David Teigland wrote: > > You removed the comment stating exactly why, see below. If that's not a > > accepted technique in the kernel, say so and I'll be happy to change it > > here and elsewhere. > > Is there a reason why users of gfs2_glock_hold() cannot use > glock_hold() directly? Either set could be trivially removed. It's such an insignificant issue that I've removed glock_hold and put. For the record, within glock.c we consistently paired inlined versions of: glock_hold() glock_put() we wanted external versions to be appropriately named so we had: gfs2_glock_hold() gfs2_glock_put() still not sure if that technique is acceptable in this crowd or not. Dave