Re: [PATCH 05/12] btrfs: remove useless mutex lock/unlock sequences

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 08:12:59AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: This code tests whether the mutex_lock can be acquired, and when the mutex_lock can be taken, it try again. So I think that it is not a meaningless code. Correct, this code is waiting for the current lock holder to finish. It's

Re: [PATCH 05/12] btrfs: remove useless mutex lock/unlock sequences

(2011/04/22 18:41), David Sterba wrote: Signed-off-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |6 -- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c index 31f33ba..c97ceab 100644 ---

Re: [PATCH 05/12] btrfs: remove useless mutex lock/unlock sequences

Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-04-25 02:25:58 -0400: (2011/04/22 18:41), David Sterba wrote: Signed-off-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |6 -- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c

[PATCH 05/12] btrfs: remove useless mutex lock/unlock sequences

Signed-off-by: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz --- fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |6 -- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c index 31f33ba..c97ceab 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c @@ -756,8