2012/5/16 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 13:57:33 +0400
> Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/cifs/cifsglob.h | 2 ++
>> fs/cifs/file.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>> fs/cifs/smb1ops.c | 7 +++++++
>> 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifsglob.h b/fs/cifs/cifsglob.h
>> index 6943448..b6e97f8 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/cifsglob.h
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/cifsglob.h
>> @@ -156,10 +156,12 @@ enum smb_version {
>>
>> struct mid_q_entry;
>> struct TCP_Server_Info;
>> +struct cifsFileInfo;
>>
>> struct smb_version_operations {
>> int (*send_cancel)(struct TCP_Server_Info *, void *,
>> struct mid_q_entry *);
>> + bool (*compare_fids)(struct cifsFileInfo *, struct cifsFileInfo *);
>> };
>>
>> struct smb_version_values {
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/file.c b/fs/cifs/file.c
>> index ac71f85..9c2d85d 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/file.c
>> @@ -671,7 +671,7 @@ cifs_del_lock_waiters(struct cifsLockInfo *lock)
>>
>> static bool
>> cifs_find_fid_lock_conflict(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset,
>> - __u64 length, __u8 type, __u16 netfid,
>> + __u64 length, __u8 type, struct cifsFileInfo *cur,
>> struct cifsLockInfo **conf_lock)
>> {
>> struct cifsLockInfo *li;
>> @@ -682,8 +682,8 @@ cifs_find_fid_lock_conflict(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset,
>> offset >= li->offset + li->length)
>> continue;
>> else if ((type & server->vals->shared_lock_type) &&
>> - ((netfid == cfile->netfid && current->tgid == li->pid)
>> - || type == li->type))
>> + ((server->ops->compare_fids(cur, cfile) &&
>> + current->tgid == li->pid) || type == li->type))
>> continue;
>> else {
>> *conf_lock = li;
>> @@ -694,17 +694,17 @@ cifs_find_fid_lock_conflict(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset,
>> }
>>
>> static bool
>> -cifs_find_lock_conflict(struct cifsInodeInfo *cinode, __u64 offset,
>> - __u64 length, __u8 type, __u16 netfid,
>> - struct cifsLockInfo **conf_lock)
>> +cifs_find_lock_conflict(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset, __u64 length,
>> + __u8 type, struct cifsLockInfo **conf_lock)
>> {
>> bool rc = false;
>> struct cifsFileInfo *fid, *tmp;
>> + struct cifsInodeInfo *cinode = CIFS_I(cfile->dentry->d_inode);
>>
>> spin_lock(&cifs_file_list_lock);
>> list_for_each_entry_safe(fid, tmp, &cinode->openFileList, flist) {
>> rc = cifs_find_fid_lock_conflict(fid, offset, length, type,
>> - netfid, conf_lock);
>> + cfile, conf_lock);
>> if (rc)
>> break;
>> }
>> @@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ cifs_lock_test(struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset, __u64 length,
>>
>> mutex_lock(&cinode->lock_mutex);
>>
>> - exist = cifs_find_lock_conflict(cinode, offset, length, type,
>> - cfile->netfid, &conf_lock);
>> + exist = cifs_find_lock_conflict(cfile, offset, length, type,
>> + &conf_lock);
>> if (exist) {
>> flock->fl_start = conf_lock->offset;
>> flock->fl_end = conf_lock->offset + conf_lock->length - 1;
>> @@ -779,8 +779,8 @@ try_again:
>> exist = false;
>> mutex_lock(&cinode->lock_mutex);
>>
>> - exist = cifs_find_lock_conflict(cinode, lock->offset, lock->length,
>> - lock->type, cfile->netfid, &conf_lock);
>> + exist = cifs_find_lock_conflict(cfile, lock->offset, lock->length,
>> + lock->type, &conf_lock);
>> if (!exist && cinode->can_cache_brlcks) {
>> list_add_tail(&lock->llist, &cfile->llist);
>> mutex_unlock(&cinode->lock_mutex);
>> @@ -1117,6 +1117,15 @@ cifs_read_flock(struct file_lock *flock, __u32 *type, int *lock, int *unlock,
>> }
>>
>> static int
>> +cifs_mandatory_lock(int xid, struct cifsFileInfo *cfile, __u64 offset,
>> + __u64 length, __u32 type, int lock, int unlock, bool wait)
>> +{
>> + return CIFSSMBLock(xid, tlink_tcon(cfile->tlink), cfile->netfid,
>> + current->tgid, length, offset, unlock, lock,
>> + (__u8)type, wait, 0);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> cifs_getlk(struct file *file, struct file_lock *flock, __u32 type,
>> bool wait_flag, bool posix_lck, int xid)
>> {
>> @@ -1149,12 +1158,11 @@ cifs_getlk(struct file *file, struct file_lock *flock, __u32 type,
>> return rc;
>>
>> /* BB we could chain these into one lock request BB */
>> - rc = CIFSSMBLock(xid, tcon, netfid, current->tgid, length,
>> - flock->fl_start, 0, 1, type, 0, 0);
>> + rc = cifs_mandatory_lock(xid, cfile, flock->fl_start, length, type,
>> + 1, 0, false);
>> if (rc == 0) {
>> - rc = CIFSSMBLock(xid, tcon, netfid, current->tgid,
>> - length, flock->fl_start, 1, 0,
>> - type, 0, 0);
>> + rc = cifs_mandatory_lock(xid, cfile, flock->fl_start, length,
>> + type, 0, 1, false);
>> flock->fl_type = F_UNLCK;
>> if (rc != 0)
>> cERROR(1, "Error unlocking previously locked "
>> @@ -1167,13 +1175,13 @@ cifs_getlk(struct file *file, struct file_lock *flock, __u32 type,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> - rc = CIFSSMBLock(xid, tcon, netfid, current->tgid, length,
>> - flock->fl_start, 0, 1,
>> - type | server->vals->shared_lock_type, 0, 0);
>> + rc = cifs_mandatory_lock(xid, cfile, flock->fl_start, length,
>> + type | server->vals->shared_lock_type, 1, 0,
>> + false);
>> if (rc == 0) {
>> - rc = CIFSSMBLock(xid, tcon, netfid, current->tgid,
>> - length, flock->fl_start, 1, 0,
>> - type | server->vals->shared_lock_type, 0, 0);
>> + rc = cifs_mandatory_lock(xid, cfile, flock->fl_start, length,
>> + type | server->vals->shared_lock_type,
>> + 0, 1, false);
>> flock->fl_type = F_RDLCK;
>> if (rc != 0)
>> cERROR(1, "Error unlocking previously locked "
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/smb1ops.c b/fs/cifs/smb1ops.c
>> index af48a8b..7565587 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/smb1ops.c
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/smb1ops.c
>> @@ -60,8 +60,15 @@ send_nt_cancel(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, void *buf,
>> return rc;
>> }
>>
>> +static inline bool
>> +cifs_compare_fids(struct cifsFileInfo *ob1, struct cifsFileInfo *ob2)
>> +{
>> + return ob1->netfid == ob2->netfid;
>> +}
>> +
>> struct smb_version_operations smb1_operations = {
>> .send_cancel = send_nt_cancel,
>> + .compare_fids = cifs_compare_fids,
>> };
>>
>
> I don't think this will work. You can't get a pointer to a static
> inline, can you? Did this actually build?
>
But you are right - the compiler will just drop 'inline' in this case
- while we don't get this patch in the mainline I think it should be
respin.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
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
