чт, 25 апр. 2019 г. в 18:42, Ronnie Sahlberg <lsahlber@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Pavel, List > > Here is an update after the email discussions. > This is minimal patch that adds a new flag to specifically indicate > that there will not be a response to this PDU and thus we can immediately > add the credits back after sending in compound_send_recv() > This flag is only set for SMB1 oplock breaks so this will not affect anything > else. > > Additionally, we no longer need to check the CIFS_ASYNC_OP flag in > compound_send_recv() so we can remove that conditional. > > This is the smallest patch which fixes the actual smb1 oplock bug thus we should > be able to get it into an rc, and stable. > But we need more but that should wait until the next merge window. > > > The next steps we should do is: > Remove CIFSSMBNotify() completely and with that also the check for > CIFS_ASYNC_OP in SendReceive() > > When that is done, the only thing that CIFS_ASYNC_OP does is make sure > we do not block in wait_for_credits(). > Which means we could rename this flag to CIFS_NON_BLOCKING. > > We should also rename CIFS_NO_RSP to CIFS_NO_RSP_BUF to make it more clear that > there will be a response status code but there won't be any or we don't care about any response buffer. > > > Thus the semantics will become: > * cifs_call_async() : if you want async handling of responses > * CIFS_NO_SRV_RSP: There won't be a response so do not wait for a reply. (only used by SMB1 oplocks) > * CIFS_ASYNC_OP/CIFS_NON_BLOCKING: do not block waiting for available credits. > Agree, sounds like a good plan. Thanks for summarizing! -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky
