@@ -62,10 +62,7 @@ struct portals_handle {
u64 h_cookie;
void *h_owner;
refcount_t h_ref;
-
- /* newly added fields to handle the RCU issue. -jxiong */
struct rcu_head h_rcu;
- spinlock_t h_lock;
};
/* handles.c */
@@ -85,7 +85,6 @@ void class_handle_hash(struct portals_handle *h, void *owner)
spin_unlock(&handle_base_lock);
h->h_owner = owner;
- spin_lock_init(&h->h_lock);
bucket = &handle_hash[h->h_cookie & HANDLE_HASH_MASK];
spin_lock(&bucket->lock);
@@ -108,13 +107,7 @@ static void class_handle_unhash_nolock(struct portals_handle *h)
CDEBUG(D_INFO, "removing object %p with handle %#llx from hash\n",
h, h->h_cookie);
- spin_lock(&h->h_lock);
- if (hlist_unhashed(&h->h_link)) {
- spin_unlock(&h->h_lock);
- return;
- }
hlist_del_init_rcu(&h->h_link);
- spin_unlock(&h->h_lock);
}
void class_handle_unhash(struct portals_handle *h)
The h_lock spinlock is now only taken while bucket->lock is held. As a handle is associated with precisely one bucket, this means that h_lock can never be contended, so it isn't needed. So discard h_lock. Also discard and increasingly irrelevant comment in the declaration of struct portals_handle. Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> --- .../staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_handles.h | 3 --- .../lustre/lustre/obdclass/lustre_handles.c | 7 ------- 2 files changed, 10 deletions(-)