From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 06:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l6NDt6bm019320 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 06:55:08 -0700 Message-ID: <46A4B33C.7060404@sandeen.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:55:08 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] - remove unused variable from locking macros References: <46A03631.7060604@sandeen.net> <20070720073023.GE29295@infradead.org> <20070722233723.GI31489@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20070722233723.GI31489@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: David Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs-oss David Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 08:30:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:12:33PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> The "s" in these locking macros used to be used like flags >>> in spin_lock_irqsave; but in the xfs codebase today it's >>> never used. >>> >>> gcc optimizes it away, but still, why keep it around? >> If we change away from the IRIX compatible signatures we could just >> kill the lock wrappers aswell.. > > Hmmm - decisions, decisions... ;) > > I think killing the wrappers entirely is probably the correct thing > to do. stuff like AIL_LOCK and GRANT_LOCK have long just been a > wrapper around a spinlock with no other purpose except to shout at > you. > > If we are going to kill the spl return from the spinlocks, then > lets just churn this once. I'll sit on this one for a bit.... > > FWIW, Eric, if you do decide to modify the patch to kill all the > wrappers, can you send them as a patch-per-wrapper, just to make > it easy to review? Ok... Russell suggested "xfs_spinlock" ;-) I assume you want to just use the linux native locking calls? -Eric