From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ritesh Harjani Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 13:42:29 +0530 Message-ID: <20191217081233.A81214C040@d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> References: <20191205103902.23618-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20191205103902.23618-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org To: willy@infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jlayton@kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, devel@lists.orangefs.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org Al, do you think this can be picked up via your tree? Please let me know if anything needed from my end on this. -ritesh On 12/5/19 4:09 PM, Ritesh Harjani wrote: > Matthew Wilcox in [1] suggested that it will be a good idea > to define some missing API instead of directly using i_rwsem in > filesystems drivers for lock/unlock/downgrade purposes. > > This patch does that work. No functionality change in this patch. > > After this there are only lockdep class of APIs at certain places > in filesystems which are directly using i_rwsem and second is XFS, > but it seems to be anyway defining it's own xfs_ilock/iunlock set > of APIs and 'iolock' naming convention for this lock. > > [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-ext4/msg68689.html > > Ritesh Harjani (1): > fs: Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems > > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 2 +- > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 4 ++-- > fs/ceph/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > fs/nfs/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > fs/orangefs/file.c | 4 ++-- > fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 2 +- > fs/readdir.c | 4 ++-- > include/linux/fs.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) >