lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [Tux3] Tux3 report: Tux3 Git tree available
    Date
    On Thursday 12 March 2009, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
    > Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
    >
    > > On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:18:29 +0900
    > > OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
    > >>
    > >> > - When 'bh' is known to be non-NULL, use put_bh() rather than brelse().
    > >>
    > >> It sounds strange. Almost all bh is non-NULL. This means we are going to
    > >> replace almost all brelse() by put_bh()?
    > >>
    > >
    > > Well.. you can make up your own mind about this. If you see benefit
    > > in the NULL-checking and extra debugging which brelse() provides then
    > > continue to use brelse().
    >
    > I thought someone started to convert it. Ok, personally, I think
    > NULL-check is just not needed always, and if it is needed, check it
    > explicitly.

    I checked in a patch last week to convert all the brelses to "blockput"
    (note how close the spelling is to Nick's block_put, an unsurprising
    accident). This should mean a little less work when the time comes to
    try out the block handles idea, and it surely doesn't hurt anything.

    Regards,

    Daniel


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-15 05:03    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean