From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E2CC19F29 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 00:42:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238486AbiHDAmf (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 20:42:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53242 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233944AbiHDAme (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 20:42:34 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2333E5A2F5; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 17:42:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=nAB+N4hwyXZEv+zCt+3ePS/cJYUGpbG3i/MA3cVn1QA=; b=ENEeIvyBL5BLCD1ba/tFivvEJw Vy/QWIPpDui+2ZX5pbndYY2nd4hYbYlwykX/Q78DuPcOEhzI0ua2uAAkjkobDquI0M2Xho2OBUYLv 0tRz/GD1U0wsyY/fJJsKaOS4lx4EgCSqFtXQo56nCLvBbPPPOA0/QNMzl4FCejNNB4jhlyYbhkW1z k0N4ODNRV51ze4h6SGvWE/CQKcsJzwng5R+1pQ/Gb5+XX9qRIW1fExKoKR+vN8VV2glLXFGuHdnVI eCMVu0FUQBCq2pMxu9au7U6hqqaoXxvvPtde4LwjEd9o7kMmdEaDa5i6OE63zRf72hWRyiXLeSvRL OJPa0M+Q==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oJOwT-009n3G-L6; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 00:42:25 +0000 Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 01:42:25 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Steven Rostedt , Al Viro , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs.git pile 3 - dcache Message-ID: References: <20220803185936.228dc690@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 04:42:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:24 PM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 06:59:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > preempt_disable_inlock() ? > > > > preempt_disable_locked()? > > Heh. Shed painting in full glory. > > Let's try just "preempt_enable_under_spinlock()" and see. > > It's a bit long, but it's still shorter than the existing usage pattern. > > And we don't have "inlock" anywhere else, and while "locked" is a real > pattern we have, it tends to be about other things (ie "I hold the > lock that you need, so don't take it"). > > And this is _explicitly_ only about spinning locks, because sleeping > locks don't do the preemption disable even without RT. > > So let's make it verbose and clear and unambiguous. It's not like I > expect to see a _lot_ of those. Knock wood. Should we have it take a spinlock_t pointer? We could have lockdep check it is actually held.