Re: [PATCH 2/2] kill xfs_lock_dir_and_entry

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:13:15AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> ping^3 - this time for real :)
> 
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 03:06:27PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > ping^2
> > 
> > On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 08:36:39AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > ping?
> > > 
> > > On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 12:58:03PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > When multiple inodes are locked in XFS it happens in order of the inode
> > > > number, with the everything but the first inode trylocked if any of
> > > > the previous inodes is in the AIL.
> > > > 
> > > > Except for the sorting of the inodes this logic is implemented in
> > > > xfs_lock_inodes, but also partially duplicated in xfs_lock_dir_and_entry
> > > > in a particularly stupid way adds a lock roundtrip if the inode ordering
> > > > is not optimal.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch adds a new helper xfs_lock_two_inodes that takes two inodes
> > > > and locks them in the most optimal way according to the above locking
> > > > protocol and uses it for all places that want to lock two inodes.
> > > > 
> > > > The only caller of xfs_lock_inodes is xfs_rename which might lock up to
> > > > four inodes.

Looks good and passes xfsqa here....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com