On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 05:23:52PM -0500, Steve French wrote: > I like Pavel's lock cleanup (1st patch of series) so far, am > continuing to review it, but I also noticed a few things that we need > to do in the future. This line of code: > > if (flock->fl_flags & FL_LEASE) > cFYI(1, "Lease on file - not implemented yet"); > > reminded me that we should check if we need to implement this (in cifs > we can return yes if we have a lease already (oplock), but in smb2.1 > and later we can request a lease or an upgrade to an existing one, on > the fly). And you'll also need to make sure you call break_lease() when you find out it's broken. A description of the smb (1/2/2.1) oplock and lease semantics would be useful--I'm curious whether they're really a good fit for the linux vfs's lease semantics. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
