From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/17] locks: remove i_have_this_lease check from __break_lease
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 10:51:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140904175132.GG16935@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1409834323-7171-14-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 08:38:39AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> I think that the intent of this code was to ensure that a process won't
> deadlock if it has one fd open with a lease on it and then breaks that
> lease by opening another fd. In that case it'll treat the __break_lease
> call as if it were non-blocking.
>
> This seems wrong -- the process could (for instance) be multithreaded
> and managing different fds via different threads. I also don't see any
> mention of this limitation in the (somewhat sketchy) documentation.
>
> Remove the check and the non-blocking behavior when i_have_this_lease
> is true.
This looks reasonable to me, but I'm always very worried about changing
userspace exposed behavior..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-04 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-04 12:38 [PATCH v2 00/17] locks: internal lease API overhaul Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 01/17] locks: consolidate "nolease" routines Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:41 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-09-04 12:49 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 18:25 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-09-04 20:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 11:48 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 02/17] security: make security_file_set_fowner, f_setown and __f_setown void return Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-07 17:11 ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2014-10-07 17:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-07 17:34 ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2014-10-07 18:02 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 03/17] locks: close potential race in lease_get_mtime Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 04/17] nfsd: fix potential lease memory leak in nfs4_setlease Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 05/17] locks: generic_delete_lease doesn't need a file_lock at all Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 20:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 0:29 ` Jeff Layton
2015-01-12 23:03 ` NeilBrown
2015-01-12 23:25 ` Jeff Layton
2015-01-13 2:14 ` NeilBrown
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 06/17] locks: clean up vfs_setlease kerneldoc comments Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 07/17] nfsd: don't keep a pointer to the lease in nfs4_file Jeff Layton
2014-09-05 21:40 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-09-06 12:33 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 08/17] locks: plumb a "priv" pointer into the setlease routines Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 09/17] locks: define a lm_setup handler for leases Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 10/17] locks: move i_lock acquisition into generic_*_lease handlers Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 11/17] locks: move freeing of leases outside of i_lock Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 14:03 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 12/17] locks: update Documentation/filesystems with new setlease semantics Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 14:02 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 13/17] locks: remove i_have_this_lease check from __break_lease Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:51 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2014-09-04 18:03 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 14/17] locks: __break_lease cleanup in preparation of allowing direct removal of leases Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 18:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 13:35 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 15/17] locks: give lm_break a return value Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 18:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 16/17] locks: set fl_owner for leases to filp instead of current->files Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 12:38 ` [PATCH v2 17/17] locks: clean up comments over fl_owner_t definition Jeff Layton
2014-09-04 17:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-05 13:36 ` Jeff Layton
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=20140904175132.GG16935@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=jlayton@primarydata.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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