From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] locks: move i_lock acquisition into generic_*_lease handlers Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 09:11:34 -0700 Message-ID: <20140824161134.GJ15908@infradead.org> References: <1408804878-1331-1-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com> <1408804878-1331-9-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com> <20140824160634.GG15908@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, hch-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, cluster-devel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jeff Layton Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140824160634.GG15908-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 09:06:34AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > We really should split a lm_release from lm_change, the way it is > used is highly confusing. In addition I think a lot of code > currently in lease_modify should move here instead, e.g. something like: At this point the old lm_change actually becomes superflous if we simply disallow changes for delegation.