From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Christine Caulfield <ccaulfie@redhat.com>,
David Teigland <teigland@redhat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 10:43:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404220810.2717.39.camel@joe-AO725>
On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:20:10 -0700
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> While doing a bit of adding argument names to fs.h,
> I looked at lm_grant and it seems the 2nd argument
> is always NULL.
>
> How about removing it?
>
> This doesn't apply as it depends on some other patches
> but it should be clear enough...
>
ACK on the general idea from my standpoint. Anything that simplifies
the file locking interfaces is a good thing, particularly the deferred
locking code.
> ---
> fs/dlm/plock.c | 8 ++++----
> fs/lockd/svclock.c | 12 +++---------
> include/linux/fs.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dlm/plock.c b/fs/dlm/plock.c
> index e59d332..e0ab3a9 100644
> --- a/fs/dlm/plock.c
> +++ b/fs/dlm/plock.c
> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct plock_op {
>
> struct plock_xop {
> struct plock_op xop;
> - int (*callback)(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *, int);
> + int (*callback)(struct file_lock *fl, int result);
> void *fl;
> void *file;
> struct file_lock flc;
> @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static int dlm_plock_callback(struct plock_op *op)
> struct file *file;
> struct file_lock *fl;
> struct file_lock *flc;
> - int (*notify)(struct file_lock *fl, struct file_lock *cont, int result) = NULL;
> + int (*notify)(struct file_lock *fl, int result) = NULL;
> struct plock_xop *xop = (struct plock_xop *)op;
> int rv = 0;
>
> @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ static int dlm_plock_callback(struct plock_op *op)
> notify = xop->callback;
>
> if (op->info.rv) {
> - notify(fl, NULL, op->info.rv);
> + notify(fl, op->info.rv);
> goto out;
> }
>
> @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ static int dlm_plock_callback(struct plock_op *op)
> (unsigned long long)op->info.number, file, fl);
> }
>
> - rv = notify(fl, NULL, 0);
> + rv = notify(fl, 0);
> if (rv) {
> /* XXX: We need to cancel the fs lock here: */
> log_print("dlm_plock_callback: lock granted after lock request "
> diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
> index ab798a8..2a61701 100644
> --- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c
> +++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
> @@ -667,22 +667,16 @@ nlmsvc_cancel_blocked(struct net *net, struct nlm_file *file, struct nlm_lock *l
> * deferred rpc for GETLK and SETLK.
> */
> static void
> -nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(struct nlm_block *block, struct file_lock *conf,
> - int result)
> +nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(struct nlm_block *block, int result)
> {
> block->b_flags |= B_GOT_CALLBACK;
> if (result == 0)
> block->b_granted = 1;
> else
> block->b_flags |= B_TIMED_OUT;
> - if (conf) {
> - if (block->b_fl)
> - __locks_copy_lock(block->b_fl, conf);
> - }
> }
>
> -static int nlmsvc_grant_deferred(struct file_lock *fl, struct file_lock *conf,
> - int result)
> +static int nlmsvc_grant_deferred(struct file_lock *fl, int result)
> {
> struct nlm_block *block;
> int rc = -ENOENT;
> @@ -697,7 +691,7 @@ static int nlmsvc_grant_deferred(struct file_lock *fl, struct file_lock *conf,
> rc = -ENOLCK;
> break;
> }
> - nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(block, conf, result);
> + nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(block, result);
> } else if (result == 0)
> block->b_granted = 1;
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> index 36b8648..6150125 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -842,7 +842,7 @@ struct lock_manager_operations {
> int (*lm_compare_owner)(struct file_lock *fl1, struct file_lock *fl2);
> unsigned long (*lm_owner_key)(struct file_lock *fl);
> void (*lm_notify)(struct file_lock *fl); /* unblock callback */
> - int (*lm_grant)(struct file_lock *fl, struct file_lock *conf, int result);
> + int (*lm_grant)(struct file_lock *fl, int result);
> void (*lm_break)(struct file_lock *fl);
> int (*lm_change)(struct file_lock **fl, int type);
> };
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-01 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-01 13:20 [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant Joe Perches
2014-07-01 14:43 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2014-07-01 16:46 ` David Teigland
2014-07-01 17:16 ` [Cluster-devel] " Bob Peterson
2014-07-01 17:22 ` David Teigland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net \
--to=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=ccaulfie@redhat.com \
--cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=teigland@redhat.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox