From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benny Halevy Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] SQUASHME: pnfs: unlock lo_lock before calling layoutdriver's setup_layoutcommit Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 21:07:36 +0300 Message-ID: <4BFEB4E8.2060102@panasas.com> References: <20100525085119.GA7998@vmware> <4BFBD1C0.1040105@panasas.com> <4BFBE146.1060906@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Boaz Harrosh , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Tao Guo Return-path: Received: from daytona.panasas.com ([67.152.220.89]:54658 "EHLO daytona.int.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753220Ab0E0SHj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 14:07:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On May. 26, 2010, 4:15 +0300, Tao Guo wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Tao Guo wrote: >> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Benny Halevy wrote: >>> Boaz Harrosh wrote: >>>> From: Tao Guo >>>> >>>> So in blocklayoutdriver, we can use GFP_KERNEL to do memory >>>> allocation in bl_setup_layoutcommit(). >>>> >>>> The state protected by the lo_lock here is clear now, which is the >>>> layout_commit's position and state. .i.e write_begin/end_pos, >>>> nfsi->lo_cred, and the call to pnfs_get_layout_stateid. >>> >>> Yeah, this looks cleaner. >> Yes, thanks. >>> Tao, can you please test and ack this patch before I merge it? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Benny > I have tested it, it is OK. > > Tao >> Great, Thanks! I merged this patch for both the 2.6.34 pnfs-all-latest tree and pnfs-all-2.6.33. Benny