From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frank Mayhar Subject: Re: [patch 29/52] fs: icache lock i_count Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 10:00:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1278522015.28816.6.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> References: <20100624030212.676457061@suse.de> <20100624030730.245992858@suse.de> <20100630072702.GF24712@dastard> <20100630120502.GB21358@laptop> <20100702190355.2b3fe6d2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100703034123.GE11732@laptop> <20100702213149.f0ca2f72.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100703050652.GF11732@laptop> <20100705224106.GZ24712@dastard> <20100706043439.GH11732@laptop> <48F48148-9909-47D0-A850-04B22403C006@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nick Piggin , Dave Chinner , Andrew Morton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, John Stultz To: Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([74.125.121.35]:52538 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754109Ab0GGRBI (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2010 13:01:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <48F48148-9909-47D0-A850-04B22403C006@mit.edu> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 06:38 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > A lot of the text in this mail thread, including your discussion of the new > locking hierarchy, and why things are the way they are, would be good > fodder for a new documentation file. And if you don't want to rename > i_lock, because no better name can be found, we should at least > document that starting as of 2.6.35/36 the meaning of i_lock changed. Actually I like the idea of renaming i_lock. It adds a bit of code churn but renaming it to more clearly reflect its function makes sense to me and might catch uses of it that might have been missed earlier. -- Frank Mayhar Google, Inc.