Re: [PATCH 0/3 RFC] improve some nfsd_mutex locking

[Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>]

On Sat, 2025-06-21 at 11:21 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On 6/20/25 7:33 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> > The first patch hopefully fixes a bug with locking as reported by Li
> > Lingfeng: some write_foo functions aren't locked properly.
> > 
> > The other two improve the locking code, particulary so that we don't
> > need a global mutex to change per-netns data.
> > 
> > I've revised the locking to use guard(mutex) for (almost) all places
> > that the per-netfs mutex is used.  I think this is an improvement but
> > would like to know what others think.
> > 
> > I haven't changed _get/_put to _pin/_unpin as Chuck wondered about.  I'm
> > not against that (though get/put are widely understood) but nor am I
> > particularly for it yet.  Again, opinions are welcome.
> 
> I think of get and put as operations you do on an object. Saying
> 
>   nfsd_startup_get();
> 
> seems a little strange to me. As I said before, it seems like you
> are protecting a critical section, not a particular object.
> 

I think of it as taking a reference to the service being up and
running. Maybe nfsd_service_get/put() ?

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>