On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 04:12:13AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > With the changes Dave implemented based on my suggestions we now have > > an abstract locked hash list data type. It has the normal hash list > > operations plus lock/unlock operations. > > That's ugly. It just hides the locking. If a bit of casting bothers > you then put it in a function where it is used like I did. Exposing the implementation details of which bit of a pointer can be used as lock when cast to an unsigned long to every user of an abstract type is what I would consider ugly, and on similar issues I've certainly not been the only one. > > So if e.g. the -rt folks need > > real locks in there there is one single place they need to touch > > instead of every user. Similarly if we want to add lockdep support > > there is just one place to touch. > > It's unnecessary. What, lockdep support? -- 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
