2012/2/28 Steve French <[email protected]>:
> I got a chance to look through this patch set in more detail on the way
> to the SMB2.2 test event.  I liked many of the patches, but this one
> seems to complicate, rather than simplify by adding a spinlock
> to what used to be an atomic_inc.  There is also a possibility that this
> spinlock will become hot.  I don't mind moving the atomic_inc inside the
> new dec_in_flight macro though to make it easier in the future.
>

The idea was to simplify the usage of inFlight value. Now it is
protected by both spin_lock and atomic mechanism in one case and with
only atomic in another -  I think it's rather complicated. The patch
gets rid of one of the protection mechanism (atomic) and use only
spin_lock - this spin_lock is used further for protecting oplock and
echo specific variables as well.

-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to