Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 3 Aug 2022 18:59:36 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs.git pile 3 - dcache
Message-ID: <20220803185936.228dc690@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whJvgykcTnR+BMJNwd+me5wvg+CxjSBeiPYTR1B2g5NpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <YurA3aSb4GRr4wlW@ZenIV>
        <CAHk-=wizUgMbZKnOjvyeZT5E+WZM0sV+zS5Qxt84wp=BsRk3eQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <YuruqoGHJONpdZcK@home.goodmis.org>
        <CAHk-=whJvgykcTnR+BMJNwd+me5wvg+CxjSBeiPYTR1B2g5NpQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:09:23 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Admittedly I think "preempt_enable_under_spinlock()" may be a bit
> *too* cumbersome as a name. It does explain what is going on - and
> both the implementation and the use end up being fairly clear (and the
> non-RT case could have some debug version that actually tests that
> preemption has already been disabled).

	preempt_disable_inlock() ?

-- Steve