[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Jiaju Zhang]

Hi,

This is an improved patch for the bug
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614332
(also http://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1278)

It is a nested PR lock calling issue, the referenced stack trace is
as:
smbd          D ffff8800013d0600     0  9522   5608 0x00000000
 ffff88002ca7fb18 0000000000000282 ffff88002f964500 ffff88002ca7fa98
 ffff8800013d0600 ffff88002ca7fae0 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
 ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff80350425>] schedule_timeout+0x175/0x210
[<ffffffff8034f580>] wait_for_common+0xf0/0x210
[<ffffffffa03e12b9>] __ocfs2_cluster_lock+0x3b9/0xa90 [ocfs2]
[<ffffffffa03e7665>] ocfs2_inode_lock_full_nested+0x255/0xdb0 [ocfs2]
[<ffffffffa0446019>] ocfs2_get_acl+0x69/0x120 [ocfs2]
[<ffffffffa0446368>] ocfs2_check_acl+0x28/0x80 [ocfs2]
[<ffffffff800e3507>] acl_permission_check+0x57/0xb0
[<ffffffff800e357d>] generic_permission+0x1d/0xc0
[<ffffffffa03eecea>] ocfs2_permission+0x10a/0x1d0 [ocfs2]
[<ffffffff800e3f65>] inode_permission+0x45/0x100
[<ffffffff800d86b3>] sys_chdir+0x53/0x90
[<ffffffff80007458>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
[<00007f34a4ef6927>] 0x7f34a4ef6927

Many thanks for your review and comments;)

Thanks,
Jiaju

Signed-off-by: <jjzhang@suse.de>
Cc: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
Cc: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
Cc: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
Cc: Tiger Yang <tiger.yang@oracle.com>
Cc: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
--- 
 fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
index da70229..ecf73f4 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
@@ -290,17 +290,30 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
 
 int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
 {
-	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
+	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
+	struct posix_acl *acl;
+	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
+	int ret = -EAGAIN;
+
+	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
+		return ret;
+
+	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
+	if (ret < 0) {
+		mlog_errno(ret);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);
 
 	if (IS_ERR(acl))
 		return PTR_ERR(acl);
 	if (acl) {
-		int ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
+		ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
 		posix_acl_release(acl);
-		return ret;
 	}
 
-	return -EAGAIN;
+	return ret;
 }
 
 int ocfs2_acl_chmod(struct inode *inode)

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Wengang Wang]

On 10-07-21 22:48, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is an improved patch for the bug
> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614332
> (also http://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1278)
> 
> It is a nested PR lock calling issue, the referenced stack trace is
> as:
> smbd          D ffff8800013d0600     0  9522   5608 0x00000000
>  ffff88002ca7fb18 0000000000000282 ffff88002f964500 ffff88002ca7fa98
>  ffff8800013d0600 ffff88002ca7fae0 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
>  ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff80350425>] schedule_timeout+0x175/0x210
> [<ffffffff8034f580>] wait_for_common+0xf0/0x210
> [<ffffffffa03e12b9>] __ocfs2_cluster_lock+0x3b9/0xa90 [ocfs2]
> [<ffffffffa03e7665>] ocfs2_inode_lock_full_nested+0x255/0xdb0 [ocfs2]
> [<ffffffffa0446019>] ocfs2_get_acl+0x69/0x120 [ocfs2]
> [<ffffffffa0446368>] ocfs2_check_acl+0x28/0x80 [ocfs2]
> [<ffffffff800e3507>] acl_permission_check+0x57/0xb0
> [<ffffffff800e357d>] generic_permission+0x1d/0xc0
> [<ffffffffa03eecea>] ocfs2_permission+0x10a/0x1d0 [ocfs2]
> [<ffffffff800e3f65>] inode_permission+0x45/0x100
> [<ffffffff800d86b3>] sys_chdir+0x53/0x90
> [<ffffffff80007458>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> [<00007f34a4ef6927>] 0x7f34a4ef6927
> 
> Many thanks for your review and comments;)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jiaju
> 
> Signed-off-by: <jjzhang@suse.de>
> Cc: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
> Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
> Cc: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
> Cc: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
> Cc: Tiger Yang <tiger.yang@oracle.com>
> Cc: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
> --- 
>  fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
>  1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> index da70229..ecf73f4 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> @@ -290,17 +290,30 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
>  
>  int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
>  {
> -	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
> +	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
> +	struct posix_acl *acl;
> +	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
> +	int ret = -EAGAIN;
> +
> +	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		mlog_errno(ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);

From here on, you need to release di_bh.

regards,
wengang.
>  
>  	if (IS_ERR(acl))
>  		return PTR_ERR(acl);
>  	if (acl) {
> -		int ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
> +		ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
>  		posix_acl_release(acl);
> -		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -	return -EAGAIN;
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  int ocfs2_acl_chmod(struct inode *inode)

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Jiaju Zhang]

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:17:01PM +0800, Wengang Wang wrote:
> On 10-07-21 22:48, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This is an improved patch for the bug
> > https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614332
> > (also http://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1278)
> > 
> > It is a nested PR lock calling issue, the referenced stack trace is
> > as:
> > smbd          D ffff8800013d0600     0  9522   5608 0x00000000
> >  ffff88002ca7fb18 0000000000000282 ffff88002f964500 ffff88002ca7fa98
> >  ffff8800013d0600 ffff88002ca7fae0 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
> >  ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
> > Call Trace:
> > [<ffffffff80350425>] schedule_timeout+0x175/0x210
> > [<ffffffff8034f580>] wait_for_common+0xf0/0x210
> > [<ffffffffa03e12b9>] __ocfs2_cluster_lock+0x3b9/0xa90 [ocfs2]
> > [<ffffffffa03e7665>] ocfs2_inode_lock_full_nested+0x255/0xdb0 [ocfs2]
> > [<ffffffffa0446019>] ocfs2_get_acl+0x69/0x120 [ocfs2]
> > [<ffffffffa0446368>] ocfs2_check_acl+0x28/0x80 [ocfs2]
> > [<ffffffff800e3507>] acl_permission_check+0x57/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff800e357d>] generic_permission+0x1d/0xc0
> > [<ffffffffa03eecea>] ocfs2_permission+0x10a/0x1d0 [ocfs2]
> > [<ffffffff800e3f65>] inode_permission+0x45/0x100
> > [<ffffffff800d86b3>] sys_chdir+0x53/0x90
> > [<ffffffff80007458>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> > [<00007f34a4ef6927>] 0x7f34a4ef6927
> > 
> > Many thanks for your review and comments;)
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Jiaju
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: <jjzhang@suse.de>
> > Cc: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>
> > Cc: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Tiger Yang <tiger.yang@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
> > --- 
> >  fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
> >  1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> > index da70229..ecf73f4 100644
> > --- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> > @@ -290,17 +290,30 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
> >  
> >  int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
> >  {
> > -	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
> > +	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
> > +	struct posix_acl *acl;
> > +	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
> > +	int ret = -EAGAIN;
> > +
> > +	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		mlog_errno(ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);
> 
> >From here on, you need to release di_bh.

Oh yes, sorry, I should check the code more closely before sending it
out;)

Here is the new patch:

Signed-off-by: Jiaju Zhang <jjzhang@suse.de>
---
 fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   23 +++++++++++++++++++----
 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
index da70229..a1d25ca 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
@@ -290,17 +290,32 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
 
 int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
 {
-	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
+	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
+	struct posix_acl *acl;
+	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
+	int ret = -EAGAIN;
+
+	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
+		return ret;
+
+	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
+	if (ret < 0) {
+		mlog_errno(ret);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);
+
+	brelse(di_bh);
 
 	if (IS_ERR(acl))
 		return PTR_ERR(acl);
 	if (acl) {
-		int ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
+		ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
 		posix_acl_release(acl);
-		return ret;
 	}
 
-	return -EAGAIN;
+	return ret;
 }
 
 int ocfs2_acl_chmod(struct inode *inode)

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Sunil Mushran]

Why not add _ocfs2_get_acl() that does the same without
taking the cluster locks?

On 07/21/2010 09:05 AM, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:17:01PM +0800, Wengang Wang wrote:
>    
>> On 10-07-21 22:48, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
>>      
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is an improved patch for the bug
>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614332
>>> (also http://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1278)
>>>
>>> It is a nested PR lock calling issue, the referenced stack trace is
>>> as:
>>> smbd          D ffff8800013d0600     0  9522   5608 0x00000000
>>>   ffff88002ca7fb18 0000000000000282 ffff88002f964500 ffff88002ca7fa98
>>>   ffff8800013d0600 ffff88002ca7fae0 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
>>>   ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002ca7ffd8 ffff88002f964340 ffff88002f964340
>>> Call Trace:
>>> [<ffffffff80350425>] schedule_timeout+0x175/0x210
>>> [<ffffffff8034f580>] wait_for_common+0xf0/0x210
>>> [<ffffffffa03e12b9>] __ocfs2_cluster_lock+0x3b9/0xa90 [ocfs2]
>>> [<ffffffffa03e7665>] ocfs2_inode_lock_full_nested+0x255/0xdb0 [ocfs2]
>>> [<ffffffffa0446019>] ocfs2_get_acl+0x69/0x120 [ocfs2]
>>> [<ffffffffa0446368>] ocfs2_check_acl+0x28/0x80 [ocfs2]
>>> [<ffffffff800e3507>] acl_permission_check+0x57/0xb0
>>> [<ffffffff800e357d>] generic_permission+0x1d/0xc0
>>> [<ffffffffa03eecea>] ocfs2_permission+0x10a/0x1d0 [ocfs2]
>>> [<ffffffff800e3f65>] inode_permission+0x45/0x100
>>> [<ffffffff800d86b3>] sys_chdir+0x53/0x90
>>> [<ffffffff80007458>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>>> [<00007f34a4ef6927>] 0x7f34a4ef6927
>>>
>>> Many thanks for your review and comments;)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jiaju
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by:<jjzhang@suse.de>
>>> Cc: Joel Becker<Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Mark Fasheh<mfasheh@suse.com>
>>> Cc: Sunil Mushran<sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Tao Ma<tao.ma@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Tiger Yang<tiger.yang@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Wengang Wang<wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>>   fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++----
>>>   1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
>>> index da70229..ecf73f4 100644
>>> --- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
>>> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
>>> @@ -290,17 +290,30 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
>>>
>>>   int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
>>>   {
>>> -	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
>>> +	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
>>> +	struct posix_acl *acl;
>>> +	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
>>> +	int ret = -EAGAIN;
>>> +
>>> +	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt&  OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +
>>> +	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode,&di_bh);
>>> +	if (ret<  0) {
>>> +		mlog_errno(ret);
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);
>>>        
>> > From here on, you need to release di_bh.
>>      
> Oh yes, sorry, I should check the code more closely before sending it
> out;)
>
> Here is the new patch:
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiaju Zhang<jjzhang@suse.de>
> ---
>   fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   23 +++++++++++++++++++----
>   1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> index da70229..a1d25ca 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> @@ -290,17 +290,32 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
>
>   int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
>   {
> -	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
> +	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
> +	struct posix_acl *acl;
> +	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
> +	int ret = -EAGAIN;
> +
> +	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt&  OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode,&di_bh);
> +	if (ret<  0) {
> +		mlog_errno(ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS, di_bh);
> +
> +	brelse(di_bh);
>
>   	if (IS_ERR(acl))
>   		return PTR_ERR(acl);
>   	if (acl) {
> -		int ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
> +		ret = posix_acl_permission(inode, acl, mask);
>   		posix_acl_release(acl);
> -		return ret;
>   	}
>
> -	return -EAGAIN;
> +	return ret;
>   }
>
>   int ocfs2_acl_chmod(struct inode *inode)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
> http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>    

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Jiaju Zhang]

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:26:42AM -0700, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> Why not add _ocfs2_get_acl() that does the same without
> taking the cluster locks?

Good suggestion! It will make the code much clearer. I attached the
improved patch as below. One thing I'm not sure is do we need to
exchange the function name '_ocfs2_get_acl' and 'ocfs2_get_acl_nolock'
as well? I'm not sure which is better, so just add a function
_ocfs2_get_acl() in this patch now.

Many thanks for your review and comments;)

Thanks,
Jiaju

Signed-off-by: Jiaju Zhang <jjzhang@suse.de>
---
 fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
index da70229..b85e092 100644
--- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
+++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
@@ -138,6 +138,29 @@ static struct posix_acl *ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(struct inode *inode,
 	return acl;
 }
 
+static struct posix_acl *_ocfs2_get_acl(struct inode *inode, int type)
+{
+	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
+	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
+	struct posix_acl *acl;
+	int ret;
+
+	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
+		return NULL;
+
+	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
+	if (ret < 0) {
+		mlog_errno(ret);
+		acl = ERR_PTR(ret);
+		return acl;
+	}
+
+	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, type, di_bh);
+
+	brelse(di_bh);
+
+	return acl;
+}
 
 /*
  * Get posix acl.
@@ -290,7 +313,7 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
 
 int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
 {
-	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
+	struct posix_acl *acl = _ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
 
 	if (IS_ERR(acl))
 		return PTR_ERR(acl);

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Wengang Wang]

ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() has the same functionality just with different
arguments. And we can't replace it with the new _ocfs2_get_acl() for the
call in ocfs2_init_acl().
So I am wondering if we really need the new _ocfs2_get_acl().

regards,
wengang.
On 10-07-22 13:26, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:26:42AM -0700, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> > Why not add _ocfs2_get_acl() that does the same without
> > taking the cluster locks?
> 
> Good suggestion! It will make the code much clearer. I attached the
> improved patch as below. One thing I'm not sure is do we need to
> exchange the function name '_ocfs2_get_acl' and 'ocfs2_get_acl_nolock'
> as well? I'm not sure which is better, so just add a function
> _ocfs2_get_acl() in this patch now.
> 
> Many thanks for your review and comments;)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jiaju
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiaju Zhang <jjzhang@suse.de>
> ---
>  fs/ocfs2/acl.c |   25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> index da70229..b85e092 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/acl.c
> @@ -138,6 +138,29 @@ static struct posix_acl *ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(struct inode *inode,
>  	return acl;
>  }
>  
> +static struct posix_acl *_ocfs2_get_acl(struct inode *inode, int type)
> +{
> +	struct ocfs2_super *osb = OCFS2_SB(inode->i_sb);
> +	struct buffer_head *di_bh = NULL;
> +	struct posix_acl *acl;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (!(osb->s_mount_opt & OCFS2_MOUNT_POSIX_ACL))
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	ret = ocfs2_read_inode_block(inode, &di_bh);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		mlog_errno(ret);
> +		acl = ERR_PTR(ret);
> +		return acl;
> +	}
> +
> +	acl = ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(inode, type, di_bh);
> +
> +	brelse(di_bh);
> +
> +	return acl;
> +}
>  
>  /*
>   * Get posix acl.
> @@ -290,7 +313,7 @@ static int ocfs2_set_acl(handle_t *handle,
>  
>  int ocfs2_check_acl(struct inode *inode, int mask)
>  {
> -	struct posix_acl *acl = ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
> +	struct posix_acl *acl = _ocfs2_get_acl(inode, ACL_TYPE_ACCESS);
>  
>  	if (IS_ERR(acl))
>  		return PTR_ERR(acl);
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
> http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Jiaju Zhang]

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
> ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() has the same functionality just with different
> arguments. And we can't replace it with the new _ocfs2_get_acl() for the
> call in ocfs2_init_acl().

I don't mean replace ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() with _ocfs2_get_acl().
What I'm just thinking is if we have the necessity of rename current
ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() with _ocfs2_get_acl(), and also rename current
_ocfs2_get_acl() in my patch with ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(). Anyway, it
is just a very minor change, I'm not sure if we should do it or not.

> So I am wondering if we really need the new _ocfs2_get_acl().

IMO, we may need _ocfs2_get_acl(). It will make the code looks clearer;)

Thanks,
Jiaju

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Wengang Wang]

My reply is mainly to Sunil. Sorry for the confusing!
Your patch is good if we need the _ocfs2_get_acl and don't touch
ocfs2_get_acl_nolock :)

regards,
wengang. 
On 10-07-22 21:16, Jiaju Zhang wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
> > ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() has the same functionality just with different
> > arguments. And we can't replace it with the new _ocfs2_get_acl() for the
> > call in ocfs2_init_acl().
> 
> I don't mean replace ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() with _ocfs2_get_acl().
> What I'm just thinking is if we have the necessity of rename current
> ocfs2_get_acl_nolock() with _ocfs2_get_acl(), and also rename current
> _ocfs2_get_acl() in my patch with ocfs2_get_acl_nolock(). Anyway, it
> is just a very minor change, I'm not sure if we should do it or not.
> 
> > So I am wondering if we really need the new _ocfs2_get_acl().
> 
> IMO, we may need _ocfs2_get_acl(). It will make the code looks clearer;)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jiaju

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Tiger Yang]

Hi, Sunil,

I think put them in ocfs2_check_acl() is better.
First, check mount option in ocfs2_check_acl()  is more clear than in 
_ocfs2_get_acl().
Second, we already have ocfs2_get_acl and ocfs2_get_acl_nolock, so it 
seems _ocfs2_get_acl is redundant and could cause confusing for reading 
the code.

Regards,
tiger

On 07/21/2010 02:26 PM, Sunil Mushran wrote:
> Why not add _ocfs2_get_acl() that does the same without
> taking the cluster locks?
>    

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Sunil Mushran]

ok. Then review Jiaju's earlier patch.

On 07/23/2010 03:42 PM, Tiger Yang wrote:
> Hi, Sunil,
>
> I think put them in ocfs2_check_acl() is better.
> First, check mount option in ocfs2_check_acl()  is more clear than in 
> _ocfs2_get_acl().
> Second, we already have ocfs2_get_acl and ocfs2_get_acl_nolock, so it 
> seems _ocfs2_get_acl is redundant and could cause confusing for 
> reading the code.
>
> Regards,
> tiger
>
> On 07/21/2010 02:26 PM, Sunil Mushran wrote:
>> Why not add _ocfs2_get_acl() that does the same without
>> taking the cluster locks?
>

[Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH V2] Fix the nested PR lock calling issue

[Jiaju Zhang]

On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:08 AM, Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com> wrote:
> ok. Then review Jiaju's earlier patch.

Thanks a lot for all the review and comments. I'll start a new drop of
that patch for easily reviewing:-)

Thanks,
Jiaju