2012/11/28 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:55:41 +0400 > Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> 2012/11/28 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> > There's also a lot of logic around what sort of locking you're doing >> > here too. I think we ought to do the same sort of I/O regardless of >> > whether POSIX locks are being used or not. >> >> We can use cifs_writev for both POSIX and mandatory variants but I >> divided them to make POSIX variant work faster (no need to check hold >> a semaphore, walk through a lock list, etc). >> > > Refresh my memory -- why do we need to handle writes differently when > POSIX vs. non-POSIX locking is in force? It seems to me that that > shouldn't matter and the behavior should be solely a function of what > sort of oplock you have. A write request can have conflict with mandatory locks set on a file. That's why we need to check for lock conflicts before issue the write/read. -- 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
