Re: [PATCH 07/18] fs: rework icount to be a locked variable

[Christoph Hellwig]

> -		atomic_inc(&inode->i_count);
> +		spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> +		inode->i_ref++;
> +		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);

Why isn't this using iref?

> +		spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> +		inode->i_ref++;
> +		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);

Same here and in a couple of others.

Hmm, I guess because the i_lock later covers other things around.
But it still looks a bit weird.

Except for this stuff the patch looks good,


Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/