From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
cel@kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] nfs/blocklayout: Fix premature PR key unregistration
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:15:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240620141519.GB20135@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3859730C-40EC-4818-9058-D74E4153623B@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 09:52:59AM -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> On 20 Jun 2024, at 1:06, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 01:39:33PM -0400, cel@kernel.org wrote:
> >> - if (test_bit(NFS_DEVICEID_UNAVAILABLE, &node->flags) == 0)
> >> + if (test_bit(NFS_DEVICEID_UNAVAILABLE, &node->flags) == 0) {
> >
> > It might be worth to invert this and keep the unavailable handling in
> > the branch as that's the exceptional case. That code is also woefully
> > under-documented and could have really used a comment.
>
> The transient device handling in general, or just this bit of it?
Basically the code behind this NFS_DEVICEID_UNAVAILABLE check here.
> >> + if (d->pr_reg)
> >> + if (d->pr_reg(d) < 0)
> >> + goto out_put;
> >
> > Empty line after variable declarations. Also is there anything that
> > synchronizes the lookups here so that we don't do multiple registrations
> > in parallel?
>
> I don't think there is. Do we get an error if we register twice?
Yes. That's the basically the same condition as the one that made
Chuck create this series.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-20 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-19 17:39 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Snapshot of fixes for SCSI PR key registration cel
2024-06-19 17:39 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] nfs/blocklayout: SCSI layout trace points for reservation key reg/unreg cel
2024-06-20 4:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 4:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 14:30 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-19 17:39 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] nfs/blocklayout: Report only when /no/ device is found cel
2024-06-20 4:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 14:59 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 12:17 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 14:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-19 17:39 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] nfs/blocklayout: Fix premature PR key unregistration cel
2024-06-20 5:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 13:52 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 13:58 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 14:15 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-06-20 14:18 ` Chuck Lever III
2024-06-20 15:45 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 15:48 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 15:58 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 15:39 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 13:51 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 14:34 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 14:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 15:30 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 15:46 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-20 15:56 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 16:45 ` Benjamin Coddington
2024-06-20 17:08 ` Chuck Lever
2024-06-19 17:39 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] nfs/blocklayout: Use bulk page allocation APIs cel
2024-06-20 4:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20240620141519.GB20135@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=cel@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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