Re: [PATCH 15/15] parallel lookups: actual switch to rwsem

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 09:02:06PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > Wouldn't it make sense to have helpers like "inode_read_lock(inode)" or > similar, > so that it is consistent with other parts of the code and easier to find? > It's a bit strange to have the filesystems use "inode_lock()" and some

Re: [PATCH 15/15] parallel lookups: actual switch to rwsem

On Apr 15, 2016, at 6:55 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > From: Al Viro > > ta-da! > > The main issue is the lack of down_write_killable(), so the places > like readdir.c switched to plain inode_lock(); once killable > variants of rwsem primitives appear, that'll be dealt with. > > lockdep side also mi

[PATCH 15/15] parallel lookups: actual switch to rwsem

From: Al Viro ta-da! The main issue is the lack of down_write_killable(), so the places like readdir.c switched to plain inode_lock(); once killable variants of rwsem primitives appear, that'll be dealt with. lockdep side also might need more work Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- fs/btrfs/ioctl.c