From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p0AJNoBO033614 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:23:50 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 085F5250085 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:26:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id D2iYLun8JqwYyS60 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:26:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 14:26:02 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] xfs: factor common write setup code Message-ID: <20110110192602.GI25029@infradead.org> References: <1294399825-1157-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1294399825-1157-8-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1294399825-1157-8-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.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 Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 10:30:24PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner > > The buffered IO and direct IO write paths share a common set of > checks and limiting code prior to issuing the write. Factor that > into a common helper function. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner > Reviewed-by: Alex Elder > --- > fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c | 128 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c > index 9ce5e12..d6ff7ff 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c > @@ -620,6 +620,60 @@ out_lock: > } > + xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL|*iolock); it seems cleaner if we left this in the caller so that locking/unlocking is not spread over N different layers. Either way the patch looks correct, so: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs