From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pBDNKJaK178684 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 17:20:20 -0600 Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 46FD2156F9EF for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id gFnxrUs09Aciu0JY for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:20:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:20:17 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] xfs: always return with the iolock held from xfs_file_aio_write_checks Message-ID: <20111213232017.GH3179@dastard> References: <20111208155755.323930705@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111208155919.215723395@bombadil.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111208155919.215723395@bombadil.infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:58:05AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > While xfs_iunlock is fine with 0 lockflags the calling conventions are much > cleaner if xfs_file_aio_write_checks never returns without the iolock held. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig I'm not sure this makes sense by itself. maybe combine it with the next patch? Regardless: Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs