Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754338Ab2HPM1d (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 08:27:33 -0400 Received: from natasha.panasas.com ([67.152.220.90]:34167 "EHLO natasha.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751421Ab2HPM1b (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 08:27:31 -0400 Message-ID: <502CE700.3070709@panasas.com> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:26:40 +0300 From: Boaz Harrosh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111113 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marco Stornelli CC: , , Andrew Morton , , , , , Al Viro , , , , Linux Kernel , , Linux FS Devel Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] vfs: remove lock and unlock functions for super block References: <502CC499.4030109@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <502CC499.4030109@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2479 Lines: 80 On 08/16/2012 12:59 PM, Marco Stornelli wrote: > From: Marco Stornelli > > Remove lock_super and unlock_super from VFS. > > Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli You can't remove the lock here. After this patch the tree will not compile, and will not be bisectable. You must move this patch to be last. Each patch should leave the tree compileable and with out any regressions. Boaz > --- > > diff -Nurp linux-3.6-rc1-orig/fs/super.c linux-3.6-rc1/fs/super.c > --- linux-3.6-rc1-orig/fs/super.c 2012-08-16 09:37:35.000000000 +0200 > +++ linux-3.6-rc1/fs/super.c 2012-08-16 09:43:46.000000000 +0200 > @@ -186,15 +186,8 @@ static struct super_block *alloc_super(s > spin_lock_init(&s->s_inode_lru_lock); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&s->s_mounts); > init_rwsem(&s->s_umount); > - mutex_init(&s->s_lock); > lockdep_set_class(&s->s_umount, &type->s_umount_key); > /* > - * The locking rules for s_lock are up to the > - * filesystem. For example ext3fs has different > - * lock ordering than usbfs: > - */ > - lockdep_set_class(&s->s_lock, &type->s_lock_key); > - /* > * sget() can have s_umount recursion. > * > * When it cannot find a suitable sb, it allocates a new > @@ -400,22 +393,6 @@ bool grab_super_passive(struct super_blo > return false; > } > -/* > - * Superblock locking. We really ought to get rid of these two. > - */ > -void lock_super(struct super_block * sb) > -{ > - mutex_lock(&sb->s_lock); > -} > - > -void unlock_super(struct super_block * sb) > -{ > - mutex_unlock(&sb->s_lock); > -} > - > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(lock_super); > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(unlock_super); > - > /** > * generic_shutdown_super - common helper for ->kill_sb() > * @sb: superblock to kill > > diff -Nurp linux-3.6-rc1-orig/include/linux/fs.h linux-3.6-rc1/include/linux/fs.h > --- linux-3.6-rc1-orig/include/linux/fs.h 2012-08-16 11:38:42.000000000 +0200 > +++ linux-3.6-rc1/include/linux/fs.h 2012-08-16 09:45:18.000000000 +0200 > @@ -1504,7 +1504,6 @@ struct super_block { > unsigned long s_magic; > struct dentry *s_root; > struct rw_semaphore s_umount; > - struct mutex s_lock; > int s_count; > atomic_t s_active; > #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY -- 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/