From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>,
jack@suse.cz, tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFCv3 2/4] ext4: Add ext4_ilock & ext4_iunlock API
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 08:35:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191120163500.GT20752@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191120121831.9639B42047@d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 05:48:30PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> Not against your suggestion here.
> But in kernel I do see a preference towards object followed by a verb.
> At least in vfs I see functions like inode_lock()/unlock().
>
> Plus I would not deny that this naming is also inspired from
> xfs_ilock()/iunlock API names.
I see those names as being "classical Unix" heritage (eh, maybe SysV).
> hmm, it was increasing the name of the macro if I do it that way.
> But that's ok. Is below macro name better?
>
> #define EXT4_INODE_IOLOCK_EXCL (1 << 0)
> #define EXT4_INODE_IOLOCK_SHARED (1 << 1)
In particular, Linux tends to prefer read/write instead of
shared/exclusive terminology. rwlocks, rwsems, rcu_read_lock, seqlocks.
shared/exclusive is used by file locks. And XFS ;-)
I agree with Jan; just leave them opencoded.
Probably worth adding inode_lock_downgrade() to fs.h instead of
accessing i_rwsem directly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-20 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-20 5:00 [RFCv3 0/4] ext4: Introducing ilock wrapper APIs & fixing i_rwsem scalablity prob. in DIO mixed-rw Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 5:00 ` [RFCv3 1/4] ext4: fix ext4_dax_read/write inode locking sequence for IOCB_NOWAIT Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 12:51 ` Jan Kara
2019-11-22 5:53 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-11-20 5:00 ` [RFCv3 2/4] ext4: Add ext4_ilock & ext4_iunlock API Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 11:23 ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-11-20 12:18 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 16:35 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2019-11-23 11:51 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 13:11 ` Jan Kara
2019-11-20 16:06 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-11-20 5:00 ` [RFCv3 3/4] ext4: start with shared iolock in case of DIO instead of excl. iolock Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 13:55 ` Jan Kara
2019-11-23 13:17 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 5:00 ` [RFCv3 4/4] ext4: Move to shared iolock even without dioread_nolock mount opt Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-20 14:32 ` Jan Kara
2019-11-26 10:51 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-26 12:45 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-11-29 17:23 ` Jan Kara
2019-11-29 17:18 ` Jan Kara
2019-12-03 11:54 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-03 12:39 ` Jan Kara
2019-12-03 13:10 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-03 13:48 ` Jan Kara
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191120163500.GT20752@bombadil.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org \
--cc=riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.