lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [git pull] vfs.git pile 3 - dcache
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 04:42:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:24 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 06:59:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > preempt_disable_inlock() ?
> >
> > preempt_disable_locked()?
>
> Heh. Shed painting in full glory.
>
> Let's try just "preempt_enable_under_spinlock()" and see.
>
> It's a bit long, but it's still shorter than the existing usage pattern.
>
> And we don't have "inlock" anywhere else, and while "locked" is a real
> pattern we have, it tends to be about other things (ie "I hold the
> lock that you need, so don't take it").
>
> And this is _explicitly_ only about spinning locks, because sleeping
> locks don't do the preemption disable even without RT.
>
> So let's make it verbose and clear and unambiguous. It's not like I
> expect to see a _lot_ of those. Knock wood.

Should we have it take a spinlock_t pointer? We could have lockdep
check it is actually held.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-04 02:43    [W:0.066 / U:0.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site