From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q1GIpfr4011779 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:51:41 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:51:47 -0600 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [patch 03/12] xfs: remove xfs_trans_unlocked_item Message-ID: <20120216185147.GS7762@sgi.com> References: <20111212141346.986825692@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111212141433.885467482@bombadil.infradead.org> <4F1D6F24.6050509@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F1D6F24.6050509@sgi.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: Mark Tinguely Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 08:31:00AM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 01/-10/63 13:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> There is no reason to wake up log space waiters when unlocking inodes or >> dquots, and the commit log has no explanation for this function either. >> >> Given that we now have exact log space wakeups everywhere we can assume >> to reason for this function was to paper over log space races in earlier the >> XFS versions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > I agree, these unlock won't change the amount of available log space. > > I did not find the exact reason for these original calls the the log > space wake routines. > > Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely I agree too. Christoph's assessment that "the reason for this function was to paper over log space races" seems spot on, and it's nice to get rid of xfs_trans_unlocked_item. Reviewed-by: Ben Myers _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs