From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 08:54:54 -0700 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 06/10] locks: plumb an "aux" pointer into the setlease routines In-Reply-To: <20140824060801.5402880c@synchrony.poochiereds.net> References: <1408804878-1331-1-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com> <1408804878-1331-7-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com> <20140824013305.GB21609@infradead.org> <20140824060801.5402880c@synchrony.poochiereds.net> Message-ID: <20140824155454.GE15908@infradead.org> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 06:08:01AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > Can you just return -EEXIST if reusing an existing one and make it a > > normal private pointer a we use elsewhere? > > > > That sounds a little confusing... > > We have two pointers we pass down to generic_setlease: the file_lock > itself and with this patch, the "aux" pointer. We can end up using > either, neither or both during a call to generic_setlease. > > A simple error code can't properly indicate which of the two pointers > got used. It might be clearer to turn the file_lock into a normal > pointer and return -EEXIST if we reused it, but leave aux as a double > pointer. There is no way we could use a new file_lock but an existing fasync_struct, as there won't be one on the newly allocated file_lock structure, but otherwise you're right. Just rename it to priv then and make me a little less grumpy ;-)