On Wed 16-06-21 08:47:05, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:53:04AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Wed 16-06-21 06:37:12, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 11:17:57AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > From: Pavel Reichl <preichl@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Refactor xfs_isilocked() to use newly introduced __xfs_rwsem_islocked(). > > > > __xfs_rwsem_islocked() is a helper function which encapsulates checking > > > > state of rw_semaphores hold by inode. > > > > > > __xfs_rwsem_islocked doesn't seem to actually existing in any tree I > > > checked yet? > > > > __xfs_rwsem_islocked is introduced by this patch so I'm not sure what are > > you asking about... :) > > The sentence structure implies that __xfs_rwsem_islocked was previously > introduced. You might change the commit message to read: > > "Introduce a new __xfs_rwsem_islocked predicate to encapsulate checking > the state of a rw_semaphore, then refactor xfs_isilocked to use it." > > Since it's not quite a straight copy-paste of the old code. Ah, ok. Sure, I can rephrase the changelog (or we can just update it on commit if that's the only problem with this series...). Oh, now I've remembered I've promised you a branch to pull :) Here it is with this change and Christoph's Reviewed-by tags: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jack/linux-fs.git hole_punch_fixes Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
