From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pBEEQlwQ212751 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:26:47 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 67E241EACD85 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:27:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id CCV6N5fT22GvZDrt for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:27:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:27:10 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] xfs: always return with the iolock held from xfs_file_aio_write_checks Message-ID: <20111214132710.GA30603@infradead.org> References: <20111208155755.323930705@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111208155919.215723395@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111213232017.GH3179@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111213232017.GH3179@dastard> 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: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:20:17AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > 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: I actually had it that way initially but split the patches because the changes aren't directly related. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs