Re: [PATCH 09/17] fs: Make last_ino, iunique independent ofinode_lock

[Nick Piggin]

On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 02:08:27AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:18:41PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Before removing the inode_lock, we need to make the last_ino  and iunique
> > counters independent of the inode_lock. last_ino can be trivially converted to
> > an atomic variable, while the iunique counter needs a new lock nested inside
> > the inode_lock to provide the same protection that the inode_lock previously
> > provided.
> 
> Given that last_ino becomes a per-cpu construct only a few patches later
> I think there's no point to make it an atomic_t here - just reorder the
> per-cpu patch before the inode_lock removal.

I wanted to avoid doing any of that until inode_lock is gone, but
perhaps for this one it makes sense. At the very least, I'll merge
the latter two patches into one, and perhaps this one too.


--
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/