On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:56:48PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote: > > BTW, I was looking at the percpu_counter interface, and I'm confused > > why we have percpu_counter_sum_and_set() and percpu_counter_sum(). If > > we're taking the fbc->lock to calculate the precise value of the > > counter, why not simply set fbc->count? > > I added the percpu_count_sum_and _set() interface, when addingdelalloc > block reservation. I agree it make sense to clean up current all the > user of percpu_counter_sum() and replace with > percpu_counter_sum_and_set(), just hasn't get chance to clean up yet. Why not make percpu_counter_sum() always do sum_and_set, and change the ext4 calls to use percpu_counter_sum()? In fact, I'm wondering why you didn't do that in the first place? Was that your trying to be as conservative as possible with respect to not changing things? - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
