From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751974AbXE3Ifw (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 04:35:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750942AbXE3Ifn (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 04:35:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:50220 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750803AbXE3Ifm (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 04:35:42 -0400 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20070529215736.GO6815@fieldses.org> References: <20070529215736.GO6815@fieldses.org> <20070529145426.19366.35289.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] AFS: Implement file locking [try #2] X-Mailer: MH-E 8.0; nmh 1.2-20070115cvs; GNU Emacs 22.0.50 Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 09:35:32 +0100 Message-ID: <32087.1180514132@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org J. Bruce Fields wrote: > --without having tried to understand how they're actually used, these > data structures (like the pending_locks and granted_locks lists) seem to > duplicate stuff that's already kept in fs/locks.c. Is there a reason > they're required? Yes. I need to get the server lock first, before going to the VFS locking routines. The VFS routines as they stand aren't particularly useful, and they permit things that AFS doesn't support (such as lock upgrading). David