Re: [PATCH 11/18] fs: Introduce per-bucket inode hash locks

Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-17T00:45:18Z

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 04:12:13AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > With the changes Dave implemented based on my suggestions we now have
> > an abstract locked hash list data type. It has the normal hash list
> > operations plus lock/unlock operations.
>
> That's ugly. It just hides the locking. If a bit of casting bothers
> you then put it in a function where it is used like I did.

Exposing the implementation details of which bit of a pointer can
be used as lock when cast to an unsigned long to every user of an
abstract type is what I would consider ugly, and on similar issues
I've certainly not been the only one.

> > So if e.g. the -rt folks need
> > real locks in there there is one single place they need to touch
> > instead of every user. Similarly if we want to add lockdep support
> > there is just one place to touch.
>
> It's unnecessary.

What, lockdep support?