From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
trond.myklebust@primarydata.com, smayhew@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/12] nfs: convert lock handling to use file_lock_context
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:34:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140910193402.GE4210@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140910152810.36ec5bc0@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:28:10PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Yes, that's the downside of moving to multiple list_heads. Still, I
> think it's worth doing that even if we end up with the code a bit more
> verbose.
>
> It may be best to consider moving some of this into helpers that live
> in locks.c. I really don't like having filesystems poke around in the
> intimate details of the file locking code as a general rule...
I was also wondering whether helpers like for_each_posix_lock() or
first_posix_lock() would be worth it.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-10 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-10 14:28 [RFC PATCH 00/12] locks: saner method for managing file locks Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] locks: add a new struct file_locking_context pointer to struct inode Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 18:38 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-09-10 18:51 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] locks: add new struct list_head to struct file_lock Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] locks: have locks_release_file use flock_lock_file to release generic flock locks Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 17:38 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-09-10 17:49 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] locks: move flock locks to file_lock_context Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] locks: convert posix " Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] locks: convert lease handling " Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] ceph: convert to looking for locks in struct file_lock_context Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] nfs: convert lock handling to use file_lock_context Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 19:17 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-09-10 19:20 ` Al Viro
2014-09-10 19:28 ` Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 19:34 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] cifs: convert it " Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] lockd: " Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] nfsd: convert to file_lock_context Jeff Layton
2014-09-10 14:28 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] locks: remove i_flock field from struct inode 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=20140910193402.GE4210@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeff.layton@primarydata.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=smayhew@redhat.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@primarydata.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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