npiggin@xxxxxxx writes: > Add a new lock, dcache_inode_lock, to protect the inode's i_dentry list > from concurrent modification. d_alias is also protected by d_lock. This would seem to ask for per object lock? Why not put it into the inode? -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
