Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 5 Dec 2000 14:40:35 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: check_lock() in d_move() and switch_names()? |
| |
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi, > > The check for BKL in d_move() and switch_names() seem to be unnecessary as > d_move() takes dcache_lock and switch_names() is only called by > d_move(). So, if the callers take BKL just for the sake of d_move() they > do not need to, but if, for other reasons, then that is fine. In any case, > the checks in both functions can be removed, imho. Opinions?
Tigran, _please_ stop it. d_move() needs BKL. Test in question is a sanity check _and_ reminder of that fact, so please leave it in place. Microoptimizations are OK when they make the code cleaner, but here...
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |