From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f51.google.com (mail-ej1-f51.google.com [209.85.218.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 064E92EB85A for ; Sat, 6 Sep 2025 12:54:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.51 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757163298; cv=none; b=U7euLwlLc/6GIbPQR/z7oj6RTuErI4dDjIXrtdPWwL/BEwvvm+5k7i+Is9SzunzXyH/BjKf0md98DlRnfBr9W/nWK5IlPqdyP16VdkuIseog8nBs7s19cvQa3w6r4ULysPf6UfU2c8Ljd7z293sKq5CswZrdQph5gRPIZjLYhgg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757163298; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aVwVRRwKFyUNFGgvpjosr9jg2Uh5JoehBnFt4mVeH8Y=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=QA9XcDHVaJF7E2dwIz8UBTCnJMC3ivWb6awOGyFDXgt50svdH73uUNAKOPTWWD6KnlBeI1rRoCaSxfTmG8pV4+thpY12chAJplDbYBlZ7a+BEEHTIhPJlZltFVUHWTMJ6DH6VXG0Ei6LU7WXZfsmrmkVMbdz4xsat5FFOjsNJqU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=TAYPeGSX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.51 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="TAYPeGSX" Received: by mail-ej1-f51.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-b04271cfc3eso397819366b.3 for ; Sat, 06 Sep 2025 05:54:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1757163295; x=1757768095; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=UE2E1w8rpI/Rz1G+l/mrlTW7yKFl3iA8f0ZeFg6IUiY=; b=TAYPeGSXa4b0lplvsuc4x8v7AHnbbEPk0mZVtctxk49RMsju7FGjL/I0FovSjX0QA8 mEEdLTd2+GK28Jpknl+OcsjEj8ZSeCLxnQt1FgYj0SMSX5Y3TPd7p5o7fXVb8QoS7N8w IShM8kF44WLlL/44wmArqnkOD2h4GMaWiJO4Z/6cf+2/4dogPxZhrkgyH7MzH/lwWKdF YNNkz2gBn10Qc89RM5FTZMVUOyG77JLAg37gdW1DU0VGHWzj+jm+CyovCogJOtw0bC/G 6m6laFjTdeSdlSrtmEwy8W0pwxMIuZUNRwceFzvetWJmM6iXKtfwdr0Mb3mTHb9uU3zp H7Pg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1757163295; x=1757768095; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UE2E1w8rpI/Rz1G+l/mrlTW7yKFl3iA8f0ZeFg6IUiY=; b=dXqG26inDjAPEb7IqGXZtc8Jkc4qtq5DHIwsKEN8ltWhwPZ4Qgb5aKrVgwmqeU1659 m8iMEUTZpR3J4UNvfTSNooYycO5aCU4vfk9pNpbFotKH0b1MdiJi2brwb4GjObOATUBs T0RjdxZK7m8+HatBWCcm36ItHq4PuFIfB0u1mL4V7qJ3NzXB5XnxNUjVXYs6Xo4AjiEj 0nwVlzdKY513jyORzl5P2h3vrfS75rI0ATQQH94GwBH/qd0Idgo+XqiRXkNivICEWDmL n9sftOcUIjh3FYMqWPbhyxHUyxDBLN3wbohBxbnRz7407W54hSf3n6p4kuMVu29moTJZ hY3g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVxf1+WWFcaYg3pZu9yjxnFZnrJ1J5aKs1NkElUh9y4HqhmfVdAGt6gPmwR+LhCmaK0VRuX@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwXpcDX0Q2TyKKouAuRVE7lwKS2bD6MAdW7Lt4t6k0qEcmG6kA9 Nsjq5UPkcOa1PkmayKnkFyK8YyDIO1O34xX5c6Nfz+LzgfS8rbNmpzoD X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvRT9s2IqHN4paQ5ZyyDqj2gUSMwjuI7MovEmKMSlPh6rcqWsj2okVXX3lpF71 cSbDEAHDXwnb5zFnxwchZLbw4KReK3T2pPTfNQZJOezl+Uh1LZ7HxYyYvR7tpjoSKhydjx00ETJ 9dOo5K5xyLIKEJ3MAPTxh8ioigaE+yEmsnmrUUpRjqZAd2SVsDYzyY3EX1StpwCRtwVHb1e7TrZ EiSrpFKGf5I7A86NHZuCvStUmN7CnmvFjZP9Hz1qCYBIt5/AT0V8pmtiyCIf+fhS9btqA/m/Onl VwHLysi4UlrDEgtsdmn/5zXIxCGVSK6ipdZtmQOhcdEYwLA8dQ2ctTIkXJ7d8CvfeHPv5ViQfCk qQrwIfHYORFKlmBFas4C8FmC2OPgs3JDjZVgOutqTK+9LutqE51kfbnj2x6qOsWb5pBzu5sV3mS c3Jo0MFhGVtymi2tNNXQsQwBtb9XqFP3VxwwSq4+2nBFrHCIkH+QVQ90BoQQvn X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH+7BOI358ylmKp8atw8bsdyRj/71mHyL9dUszzoXcWqukq4MMj2v7GgMWLJqT+/pR3VfCtNQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2d1f:b0:b04:3fe2:23c4 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-b04b1437f92mr198976866b.19.1757163295028; Sat, 06 Sep 2025 05:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from local.station (net-93-148-93-71.cust.vodafonedsl.it. [93.148.93.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-b046b783722sm838883666b.97.2025.09.06.05.54.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 06 Sep 2025 05:54:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Alessio Attilio To: alessio.attilio.dev@gmail.com Cc: aahringo@redhat.com, gfs2@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, teigland@redhat.com Subject: [PATCH] fix: delete del_proc_lock Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2025 14:54:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20250906125451.19206-1-alessio.attilio.dev@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.48.1 In-Reply-To: <20250905160552.496879-1-alessio.attilio.dev@gmail.com> References: <20250905160552.496879-1-alessio.attilio.dev@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: gfs2@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The del_proc_lock function was originally retained for testing purposes during development of the Distributed Lock Manager (DLM). With testing now complete and the function no longer serving a runtime role, it is safe to remove. Reason for Removal: The function is unused in production code and was only kept temporarily for debugging and validation. Its presence is no longer necessary and may cause confusion or clutter. Impact: This change simplifies the codebase and improves maintainability without affecting functionality or stability. Signed-off-by: Alessio Attilio --- fs/dlm/lock.c | 30 ++---------------------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/dlm/lock.c b/fs/dlm/lock.c index 9d74b78d3544..9170b5c09823 100644 --- a/fs/dlm/lock.c +++ b/fs/dlm/lock.c @@ -6146,35 +6146,9 @@ static int unlock_proc_lock(struct dlm_ls *ls, struct dlm_lkb *lkb) return error; } -/* We have to release clear_proc_locks mutex before calling unlock_proc_lock() - (which does lock_rsb) due to deadlock with receiving a message that does - lock_rsb followed by dlm_user_add_cb() */ - -static struct dlm_lkb *del_proc_lock(struct dlm_ls *ls, - struct dlm_user_proc *proc) +static void clean_proc_locks(struct dlm_ls *ls, struct dlm_user_proc *proc) { - struct dlm_lkb *lkb = NULL; - - spin_lock_bh(&ls->ls_clear_proc_locks); - if (list_empty(&proc->locks)) - goto out; - - lkb = list_entry(proc->locks.next, struct dlm_lkb, lkb_ownqueue); - list_del_init(&lkb->lkb_ownqueue); - - if (lkb->lkb_exflags & DLM_LKF_PERSISTENT) - set_bit(DLM_DFL_ORPHAN_BIT, &lkb->lkb_dflags); - else - set_bit(DLM_IFL_DEAD_BIT, &lkb->lkb_iflags); - out: - spin_unlock_bh(&ls->ls_clear_proc_locks); - return lkb; -} - -void dlm_clear_proc_locks(struct dlm_ls *ls, struct dlm_user_proc *proc) -{ - struct dlm_callback *cb, *cb_safe; - struct dlm_lkb *lkb, *safe; + struct dlm_lkb *lkb; dlm_lock_recovery(ls); -- 2.48.1