Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 May 2006 23:01:01 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 37/61] lock validator: special locking: dcache |
| |
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > > +enum dentry_d_lock_type > > > +{ > > > + DENTRY_D_LOCK_NORMAL, > > > + DENTRY_D_LOCK_NESTED > > > +}; > > > + > > > struct dentry_operations { > > > int (*d_revalidate)(struct dentry *, struct nameidata *); > > > int (*d_hash) (struct dentry *, struct qstr *); > > > > DENTRY_D_LOCK_NORMAL isn't used anywhere. > > I guess it is implied with the normal spin_lock. Since > spin_lock(&target->d_lock) and > spin_lock_nested(&target->d_lock, DENTRY_D_LOCK_NORMAL) > are equivalent. (DENTRY_D_LOCK_NORMAL == 0)
correct. This is the case for all the subtype enum definitions: 0 means normal spinlock [rwlock, rwsem, mutex] API use.
Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |