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

[Christoph Hellwig]

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?
--
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/