On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 02:46:57PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> I am fine with your proposed change as long as it gets the job done.
I suspect that the real problem is the unlock part of read_seqretry_or_unlock();
for d_walk() we want to be able to check if we need retry and continue walking
if we do not. Let's do it that way: I've applied your patch as is, with the
next step being
* split read_seqretry_or_unlock():
need_seqretry() (return (!(seq & 1) && read_seqretry(lock, seq))
done_seqretry() (if (seq & 1) write_sequnlock(lock, seq)),
your if (read_seqretry_or_unlock(&rename_lock, &seq))
goto restart;
becoming
if (need_seqretry(&rename_lock, seq)) {
seq = 1;
goto restart;
}
done_seqretry(&rename_lock, seq);
Then d_walk() is trivially massaged to use of read_seqbegin_or_lock(),
need_seqretry() and done_seqretry(). Give me a few, I'll post it...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
