From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q0NEUx8N108182 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:31:00 -0600 Message-ID: <4F1D6F24.6050509@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:31:00 -0600 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [patch 03/12] xfs: remove xfs_trans_unlocked_item References: <20111212141346.986825692@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111212141433.885467482@bombadil.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20111212141433.885467482@bombadil.infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com 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 > 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 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs