Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20231007203543.1377452-6-willy@infradead.org>
References: <20231007203543.1377452-1-willy@infradead.org> <20231007203543.1377452-6-willy@infradead.org>
From:   Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 8 Oct 2023 22:26:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGudoHEg7oWG8CuyivWRsWLZZtw51oY0=PjLPRzFZDDZf=kzGg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] fs: Add inode_assert_locked() and inode_assert_locked_excl()
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On 10/7/23, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> +static inline void inode_assert_locked_excl(const struct inode *inode)
> +{
> +	rwsem_assert_held_write(&inode->i_rwsem);
> +}
> +
>  static inline void inode_lock_nested(struct inode *inode, unsigned
> subclass)
>  {
>  	down_write_nested(&inode->i_rwsem, subclass);

Why "excl" instead of "write"? Apart from looking weird, it is
inconsistent with "prior art" in the file: i_mmap_assert_write_locked.

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>