Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-23 Thread David Howells
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I thought we long long since removed the volatiles. They're certainly still there in i386 and x86_64. David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-23 Thread Satyam Sharma
[ Restricting discussion to the i386 bitops implementation. ] Hi Nick, On 7/23/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, On 7/23/07, Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > >>So you did. Then to answer that, ye

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-23 Thread Satyam Sharma
Hi, On 7/23/07, Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>So you did. Then to answer that, yes it could be faster because there are >>stupid volatiles sprinkled all over the bitops code so you could easily >>end up having to do m

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-23 Thread Nick Piggin
Linus Torvalds wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: So you did. Then to answer that, yes it could be faster because there are stupid volatiles sprinkled all over the bitops code so you could easily end up having to do more loads. Does it make a real difference? Unlikely, but David lo

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-20 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > So you did. Then to answer that, yes it could be faster because there are > stupid volatiles sprinkled all over the bitops code so you could easily > end up having to do more loads. Does it make a real difference? Unlikely, > but David loves counting c

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-20 Thread Nick Piggin
Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:56:53 +1000 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:47:32 +0100 David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: + if (type == AFS_LOCK_READ && + vnode->flags & (1 << AFS_VNODE_READLOCKED)) {

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-19 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:56:53 +1000 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:47:32 +0100 > > David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>+ if (type == AFS_LOCK_READ && > >>+ vnode->flags & (1 << AFS_VNODE_READLOCKED)) { > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-19 Thread Nick Piggin
Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:47:32 +0100 David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: + if (type == AFS_LOCK_READ && + vnode->flags & (1 << AFS_VNODE_READLOCKED)) { Here we use vnode->flags & (1 << foo) + set_bit(AFS_VNODE_LOCKING, &vnode

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-18 Thread David Howells
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here we use > > vnode->flags & (1 << foo) > > > + set_bit(AFS_VNODE_LOCKING, &vnode->flags); > > and elsewhere we use set_bit(foo, &vnode->flags) and clear_bit() Ah... IIRC I was originally testing multiple bits in one go (test_bit()'

Re: [PATCH] AFS: Fix file locking

2007-07-17 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:47:32 +0100 David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > + if (type == AFS_LOCK_READ && > + vnode->flags & (1 << AFS_VNODE_READLOCKED)) { Here we use vnode->flags & (1 << foo) > + set_bit(AFS_VNODE_LOCKING, &vnode->flags); and elsewhere we u