From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S933307AbeCNC60 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:58:26 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:54208 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932809AbeCNC6Z (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:58:25 -0400
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 19:58:18 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: dcache: remove trylock loops (was Re: [BUG] lock_parent()
 breakage when used from shrink_dentry_list())
Message-ID: <20180314025818.GA14596@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20180223174216.GD30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20180223201317.GG30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFyP9JtyzUzA_S2sdKCK+8CZtNoA3UkXg5X4J0Hf2_ekjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180224002248.GH30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20180225073950.GI30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <87bmgbnhar.fsf_-_@linutronix.de>
 <20180312191351.GN30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <87zi3bn1on.fsf@linutronix.de>
 <87lgevn0ss.fsf@linutronix.de>
 <20180313235930.GX30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180313235930.GX30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:59:30PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> Come to think of that, it might make sense to lift rcu_read_lock() all the
> way out of that sucker.  Objections?  Below is the incremental I'd fold into
> that commit:

Looks clearer to me.