| Message ID | 20210109075903.208222-13-ebiggers@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | lazytime fix and cleanups | expand |
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 11:59:03PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> > > The comment in xfs_file_aio_write_checks() about calling file_modified() > after dropping the ilock doesn't make sense, because the code that > unconditionally acquires and drops the ilock was removed by > commit 467f78992a07 ("xfs: reduce ilock hold times in > xfs_file_aio_write_checks"). > > Remove this outdated comment. > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Yep, thanks for the update. :) Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> --D > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 6 ------ > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c > index 5b0f93f738372..4927c6653f15d 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c > @@ -389,12 +389,6 @@ xfs_file_aio_write_checks( > } else > spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock); > > - /* > - * Updating the timestamps will grab the ilock again from > - * xfs_fs_dirty_inode, so we have to call it after dropping the > - * lock above. Eventually we should look into a way to avoid > - * the pointless lock roundtrip. > - */ > return file_modified(file); > } > > -- > 2.30.0 >
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c index 5b0f93f738372..4927c6653f15d 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c @@ -389,12 +389,6 @@ xfs_file_aio_write_checks( } else spin_unlock(&ip->i_flags_lock); - /* - * Updating the timestamps will grab the ilock again from - * xfs_fs_dirty_inode, so we have to call it after dropping the - * lock above. Eventually we should look into a way to avoid - * the pointless lock roundtrip. - */ return file_modified(file); }