From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:25:01 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/62] XArray November 2017 Edition Message-ID: <20171123012501.GK4094@dastard> References: <20171122210739.29916-1-willy@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171122210739.29916-1-willy@infradead.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 01:06:37PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > From: Matthew Wilcox > > I've lost count of the number of times I've posted the XArray before, > so time for a new numbering scheme. Here're two earlier versions, > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/17/724 > https://lwn.net/Articles/715948/ (this one's more loquacious in its > description of things that are better about the radix tree API than the > XArray). > > This time around, I've gone for an approach of many small changes. > Unfortunately, that means you get 62 moderate patches instead of dozens > of big ones. Where's the API documentation that tells things like constraints about locking and lock-less lookups via RCU? e.g. I notice in the XFS patches you seem to randomly strip out rcu_read_lock/unlock() pairs that are currently around radix tree lookup operations without explanation. Without documentation describing how this stuff is supposed to work, review is somewhat difficult... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org