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 q32JQCcH244123 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 14:26:12 -0500 Message-ID: <4F79FD53.3030105@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:26:11 -0500 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] xfs: reduce ilock hold times in xfs_file_aio_write_checks References: <20120327143445.196524266@bombadil.infradead.org> <20120327143826.433267717@bombadil.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20120327143826.433267717@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 03/27/12 09:34, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > We do not need the ilock for generic_write_checks and the i_size read, > which are protected by i_mutex and/or iolock, so reduce the ilock > critical section to just the call to xfs_zero_eof. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig Looks good. Reviewed-by: Mark Tinguely _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs