From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o8ELR9MW148893 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:27:09 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/18] xfs: convert pag_ici_lock to a spin lock From: Alex Elder In-Reply-To: <1284461777-1496-7-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> References: <1284461777-1496-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1284461777-1496-7-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:26:59 -0500 Message-ID: <1284499619.9701.71.camel@doink> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: aelder@sgi.com List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 20:56 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner > > now that we are using RCU protection for the inode cache lookups, > the lock is only needed on the modification side. Hence it is not > necessary for the lock to be a rwlock as there are no read side > holders anymore. Convert it to a spin lock to reflect it's exclusive > nature. This is of course contingent on the correctness of the RCU change before this. But this one looks good. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner > --- > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_sync.c | 16 ++++++++-------- _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs