On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 22:18:38 +1000 Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The inode moves between different lists protected by the inode_lock. Introduce > a new lock that protects all of the lists (dirty, unused, in use, etc) that the > inode will move around as it changes state. As this is mostly a list for > protecting the writeback lists, name it wb_inode_list_lock and nest all the > list manipulations in this lock inside the current inode_lock scope. All those spin_trylock()s are real ugly. They're unexplained in the changelog and unexplained in code comments. I'd suggest that each such site have a comment explaining why we're resorting to this. -- 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
