From: Larry Chen <lchen@suse.com>
To: piaojun <piaojun@huawei.com>, Changwei Ge <ge.changwei@h3c.com>,
"mfasheh@versity.com" <mfasheh@versity.com>,
"jlbec@evilplan.org" <jlbec@evilplan.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com" <ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] Correct a comment error
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 10:37:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40b08149-1a35-0dcc-116a-9df71b629950@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5A98B3BB.3040408@huawei.com>
Hi Changwei and Jun,
Thanks for your advice.
On 03/02/2018 10:15 AM, piaojun wrote:
> Hi Changwei,
>
> On 2018/3/2 9:59, Changwei Ge wrote:
>> Hi Jun,
>> I think the comments for both two functions are OK.
>> No need to rework them.
>> As we know, ocfs2 lock name(lock id) are composed of several parts including
>> block number.
> I looked though the comments involved 'lockid', and found 'lockid' is a
> concept in dlm level, so ocfs2 level should not be aware of it.
When reading source code of ocfs2 level, you'll find that 'lockid' is a new
concept that has not occurred or be explained before.
It's kind of difficult to understand.
Maybe 'blockno' or 'blockid' is more sensible than 'lockid'
I'm willing to fix them all.
Thanks
Larry
> thanks,
> Jun
>> Thanks,
>> Changw2ei
>>
>> On 2018/3/1 20:58, piaojun wrote:
>>> Hi Larry,
>>>
>>> There is the same mistake in ocfs2_reflink_inodes_lock(), could you help
>>> fixing them all?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Jun
>>>
>>> On 2018/2/28 18:17, Larry Chen wrote:
>>>> The function ocfs2_double_lock tries to lock the inode with lower
>>>> blockid first, not lockid.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Larry Chen <lchen@suse.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/ocfs2/namei.c | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> index c801eddc4bf3..30d454de35a8 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/namei.c
>>>> @@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ static int ocfs2_double_lock(struct ocfs2_super *osb,
>>>> if (*bh2)
>>>> *bh2 = NULL;
>>>>
>>>> - /* we always want to lock the one with the lower lockid first.
>>>> + /* we always want to lock the one with the lower blockid first.
>>>> * and if they are nested, we lock ancestor first */
>>>> if (oi1->ip_blkno != oi2->ip_blkno) {
>>>> inode1_is_ancestor = ocfs2_check_if_ancestor(osb, oi2->ip_blkno,
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>>> Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
>>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>>>
>> .
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-02 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20180228101720.20725-1-lchen@suse.com>
2018-03-01 0:36 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH] Correct a comment error Changwei Ge
2018-03-01 12:56 ` piaojun
2018-03-02 1:59 ` Changwei Ge
2018-03-02 2:15 ` piaojun
2018-03-02 2:37 ` Larry Chen [this message]
2018-03-02 2:38 ` Changwei Ge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=40b08149-1a35-0dcc-116a-9df71b629950@suse.com \
--to=lchen@suse.com \
--cc=ge.changwei@h3c.com \
--cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfasheh@versity.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=piaojun@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox