Re: [PATCH] fs: use kfree_rcu instead of i_callback

2014-10-05 Thread Chuck Ebbert
On Sat, 4 Oct 2014 23:00:42 -0400 John de la Garza wrote: > Since the callback is doing nothing more than calling kfree() we can > use kfree_rcu() instead of having to use a callback. > > Signed-off-by: John de la Garza > --- > fs/inode.c | 8 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 delet

Re: [PATCH] fs: use kfree_rcu instead of i_callback

2014-10-04 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 11:00:42PM -0400, John de la Garza wrote: > Since the callback is doing nothing more than calling kfree() we can > use kfree_rcu() instead of having to use a callback. Except that this > - kmem_cache_free(inode_cachep, inode); isn't kfree()... -- To unsubscribe from t

[PATCH] fs: use kfree_rcu instead of i_callback

2014-10-04 Thread John de la Garza
Since the callback is doing nothing more than calling kfree() we can use kfree_rcu() instead of having to use a callback. Signed-off-by: John de la Garza --- fs/inode.c | 8 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c index 26753ba..51deccd 10064