From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:37:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id l6MNbWbm001880 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:37:34 -0700 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:37:23 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] - remove unused variable from locking macros Message-ID: <20070722233723.GI31489@sgi.com> References: <46A03631.7060604@sandeen.net> <20070720073023.GE29295@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070720073023.GE29295@infradead.org> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Eric Sandeen , xfs-oss On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 08:30:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:12:33PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > The "s" in these locking macros used to be used like flags > > in spin_lock_irqsave; but in the xfs codebase today it's > > never used. > > > > gcc optimizes it away, but still, why keep it around? > > If we change away from the IRIX compatible signatures we could just > kill the lock wrappers aswell.. Hmmm - decisions, decisions... ;) I think killing the wrappers entirely is probably the correct thing to do. stuff like AIL_LOCK and GRANT_LOCK have long just been a wrapper around a spinlock with no other purpose except to shout at you. If we are going to kill the spl return from the spinlocks, then lets just churn this once. I'll sit on this one for a bit.... FWIW, Eric, if you do decide to modify the patch to kill all the wrappers, can you send them as a patch-per-wrapper, just to make it easy to review? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group