From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:53484 "EHLO
	ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751184AbcF2ISA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 29 Jun 2016 04:18:00 -0400
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:17:05 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	He Kuang <hekuang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: Q. hlist_bl_add_head_rcu() in d_alloc_parallel()
Message-ID: <20160629081705.GZ14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20160617221614.GE14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <2123.1466313884@jrobl>
 <20160619165557.GH14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <28627.1466397254@jrobl>
 <20160620053530.GI14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20287.1466644756@jrobl>
 <20160623025809.GT14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzwaiLbT8LrQTnktGdoizc9uuRbfe4cvdykXO_K8Kj2aQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160625225423.GV14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFyboLUOqNgDSF9_3iK9ECRFP821Bzmd88ABHj7xSGwWUw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyboLUOqNgDSF9_3iK9ECRFP821Bzmd88ABHj7xSGwWUw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 06:25:58PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > BTW, speaking of that area - is there any reason why dentry_cmp()
> > isn't simply
> >         return dentry_string_cmp(lockless_dereference(dentry->d_name.name),
> >                                  ct, tcount);
> > other than "it predates lockless_dereference()"?
> 
> No, the only important thing is that it's a read-once, and has the
> smp_read_barrier_depends().
> 
> So lockless_derefence() looks like the right thing to do, it is just
> that - as you suspected - the code predates that concept.

... and as the matter of fact, patch to that effect (only cosmetically different
from what I'd cooked) had been posted by He Kuang back in March.  At least
I'd spotted that before pushing mine out...

The patch posted back then applied, with slightly edited commit message.  Apologies
for missing it...