[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH UPDATED 38/40] cifs: use workqueue instead of slow-work

On 01/24/2010 09:13 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> Are you sure it needs to be changed?
> I'm pretty sure we do. This flag only gets set to true if there's a
> reconnection event. If there is one, then any oplock break queued up
> before that happened is now invalid and shouldn't be sent.
> It's a fairly minor point however. Even if we send the oplock break,
> it's very unlikely to be treated as valid by the server as I don't
> think the file would have a chance to be reopened prior to that.
> If this is the way that the code works now, then let's go ahead with
> your version and I'll plan to queue up a separate patch to change that
> behavior after your changes go in.

Yeap, that sounds good to me or I just can queue a separate patch to
do that along with this one so that you don't have to remember
queueing it later.



 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-25 16:25    [W:0.091 / U:51.588 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site