Re: [PATCH 2/7] fs/locks: Replace lg_global with a percpu-rwsem

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 10:36:01AM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> There might be further archives (other than gmane.org or some such),
> however so far lkml.org seemed to be quite ok
> and with IMHO better usability than some others

Agreed, in that I liked the interface best too, however:

> (although it has degraded a lot indeed in recent times,
> judging from
> many server/connection issues and
> not listing details any more due to SPAM etc.).

this has gotten to the point where it often simply doesn't show messages
anymore, threads are incomplete etc..

> > > A possibly good way to commit-micro-manage this would be:
> > > 1. commit shoves things into a newly created encapsulation/wrapper helper
> > >    stuff_lock(&flc_lock);  /* <---- naming surely can be improved here */
> > 
> > No, because not all instances of flc_flock need the percpu-rwsem held,
> > creating such a wrapper could mistakenly create the impression it
> > should.
> 
> OK, that aspect sounds valid.
> However with a helper appropriately named to be focussing on
> that use case (protecting that section communication),
> it might be less of a concern.

Dunno, I'd struggling to come up with a sensible name for such a
construct. I'll leave that to others. If it really is desired we can
always do so later.