locks: give the blocked_hash its own spinlock
authorJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:58:20 +0000 (08:58 -0400)
committerAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:57:46 +0000 (12:57 +0400)
There's no reason we have to protect the blocked_hash and file_lock_list
with the same spinlock. With the tests I have, breaking it in two gives
a barely measurable performance benefit, but it seems reasonable to make
this locking as granular as possible.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

No differences found