From 3f9bcca7820a6711307b6499952b13cfcfc31dd6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Suresh Jayaraman Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 23:29:37 +0530 Subject: cifs: convert cifs_tcp_ses_lock from a rwlock to a spinlock cifs_tcp_ses_lock is a rwlock with protects the cifs_tcp_ses_list, server->smb_ses_list and the ses->tcon_list. It also protects a few ref counters in server, ses and tcon. In most cases the critical section doesn't seem to be large, in a few cases where it is slightly large, there seem to be really no benefit from concurrent access. I briefly considered RCU mechanism but it appears to me that there is no real need. Replace it with a spinlock and get rid of the last rwlock in the cifs code. Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman Signed-off-by: Steve French --- fs/cifs/cifssmb.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'fs/cifs/cifssmb.c') diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c b/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c index bfb59a68e4f..e98f1f317b1 100644 --- a/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c +++ b/fs/cifs/cifssmb.c @@ -593,9 +593,9 @@ CIFSSMBNegotiate(unsigned int xid, struct cifsSesInfo *ses) rc = -EIO; goto neg_err_exit; } - read_lock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); + spin_lock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); if (server->srv_count > 1) { - read_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); + spin_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); if (memcmp(server->server_GUID, pSMBr->u.extended_response. GUID, 16) != 0) { @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ CIFSSMBNegotiate(unsigned int xid, struct cifsSesInfo *ses) 16); } } else { - read_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); + spin_unlock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock); memcpy(server->server_GUID, pSMBr->u.extended_response.GUID, 16); } -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2