Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751151AbVI3R1J (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:27:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751221AbVI3R1J (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:27:09 -0400 Received: from moraine.clusterfs.com ([66.96.26.190]:23522 "EHLO moraine.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751151AbVI3R1I (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:27:08 -0400 From: Nikita Danilov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17213.30072.553155.302230@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:27:20 +0400 To: "Vladimir V. Saveliev" Cc: LKML Subject: Re: I request inclusion of reiser4 in the mainline kernel Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel In-Reply-To: <433D2B21.6040406@namesys.com> References: <432AFB44.9060707@namesys.com> <20050918110658.GA22744@infradead.org> <432E8282.6060905@namesys.com> <20050919092444.GA17501@infradead.org> <43302CF7.2010901@namesys.com> <20050920154711.GA6698@infradead.org> <433D2B21.6040406@namesys.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (patch 17) "chayote" (+CVS-20040321) XEmacs Lucid Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1644 Lines: 47 Vladimir V. Saveliev writes: > Hello > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > ... > > Looking at the actual code all these point to the spin lock obsufcation > > SPIN_LOCK_FUNCTIONS/RW_LOCK_FUNCTIONS from spin_macros.h which I told > > to get rid of in the first round of reviews. > > ... > > reiser4 spinlock macros provide following functionality: > > (1) encapsulation of locks: instead of writing spin_lock(&obj->lock), > where obj is object of type foo, one writes spin_lock_foo(obj). > > (2) keeping information about number of locks of particular type currently > held by thread > > (3) checking that locks are acquired in the proper order. > > (4) collection of spin lock contention statistics > > > I agree that (1) is not very necessary. (2) and (4) helped a lot in early > debugging. Now we are about to remove it. This was already discussed during earlier attempts to merge reiser4. The proper solution purportedly is to make useful features of reiser4 spin-lock code generic and merge them so that the rest of kernel can enjoy their superiority. > > However, we would prefer to keep (3). It makes catching spinlock deadlocks very > easy. Don't you think that makes sence? Lock-ordering monitoring was _immensely_ useful. For one thing it forces one to have complete and up to date description of lock ordering. > > Thanks Nikita. - 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/