dlm: change rsbtbl rwlock to spinlock
The rwlock is almost always used in write mode, so there's no reason
to not use a spinlock instead.
Signed-off-by: David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>
diff --git a/fs/dlm/recover.c b/fs/dlm/recover.c
index 80aba5b..eda43f3 100644
--- a/fs/dlm/recover.c
+++ b/fs/dlm/recover.c
@@ -726,7 +726,7 @@
}
for (i = 0; i < ls->ls_rsbtbl_size; i++) {
- read_lock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
+ spin_lock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
list_for_each_entry(r, &ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].list, res_hashchain) {
list_add(&r->res_root_list, &ls->ls_root_list);
dlm_hold_rsb(r);
@@ -737,7 +737,7 @@
but no other recovery steps should do anything with them. */
if (dlm_no_directory(ls)) {
- read_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
+ spin_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
continue;
}
@@ -745,7 +745,7 @@
list_add(&r->res_root_list, &ls->ls_root_list);
dlm_hold_rsb(r);
}
- read_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
+ spin_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
}
out:
up_write(&ls->ls_root_sem);
@@ -775,7 +775,7 @@
int i;
for (i = 0; i < ls->ls_rsbtbl_size; i++) {
- write_lock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
+ spin_lock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(r, safe, &ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].toss,
res_hashchain) {
if (dlm_no_directory(ls) || !is_master(r)) {
@@ -783,7 +783,7 @@
dlm_free_rsb(r);
}
}
- write_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
+ spin_unlock(&ls->ls_rsbtbl[i].lock);
}
}