Re: [Tux3] Tux3 report: Tux3 Git tree available

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net>]

On Thursday 12 March 2009, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:18:29 +0900
> > OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> > - When 'bh' is known to be non-NULL, use put_bh() rather than brelse().
> >> 
> >> It sounds strange. Almost all bh is non-NULL. This means we are going to
> >> replace almost all brelse() by put_bh()?
> >> 
> >
> > Well..  you can make up your own mind about this.  If you see benefit
> > in the NULL-checking and extra debugging which brelse() provides then
> > continue to use brelse().
> 
> I thought someone started to convert it. Ok, personally, I think
> NULL-check is just not needed always, and if it is needed, check it
> explicitly.

I checked in a patch last week to convert all the brelses to "blockput"
(note how close the spelling is to Nick's block_put, an unsurprising
accident).  This should mean a little less work when the time comes to
try out the block handles idea, and it surely doesn't hurt anything.

Regards,

Daniel