[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] locks: let the caller free file_lock on ->setlease failure
    On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 03:03:32PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 09:40:24PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
    > > The irritating thing is that the only lease user I understand is the
    > > nfsd code, and it doesn't want this lease-merging behavior; the only
    > > reason that fl_change is there is so it can just turn this case into an
    > > error every time.
    > Yes.
    > > And I have no idea what the requirements are of any other users: do
    > > leases behave like this on purpose, or was it just an arbitrary choice,
    > > and does anyone depend on it now?
    > Adding Willy and Stephen to the Cc list as they wrote the code.
    > > In the end maybe it would be better just to leave leases as they are and
    > > define a new lock type for nfsd.
    > >
    > > We'd probably have to do that eventually anyway, and it'd save me trying
    > > to guess what the lease semantics are supposed to be....
    > I'd rather see both leases and the nfs4 delegations detangled from the
    > locks.c code.

    What are you thinking of?

    > It's far too much of a mess already anyway.
    > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] locks: fix leak on merging leases
    > >
    > > We must also free the passed-in lease in the case it wasn't used because
    > > an existing lease was upgrade/downgraded or already existed.
    > >
    > > Note the nfsd caller doesn't care because it's fl_change callback
    > > returns an error in those cases.
    > The patch looks good to me. Care to feed it to Linus?

    Yep, will do.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-11-08 17:13    [W:0.021 / U:0.340 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site