On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 02:11:37PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 16:04 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > I can't see any reason we particularly need to call this until the last > > gssd closes the pipe. > > There's a very good reason: if we call rpc_close_pipes() then it is > because the kernel listener is shutting down. At that point, we want to > return EPIPE for all future read() or write() attempts by gssd. Sure. This doesn't interfere with that--we're still calling release_pipe() itself (which is the function that sets rpci->ops to NULL), it's only the ->release_pipe() op that we're not calling. > > Also, this allows to guarantee that open_pipe and release_pipe are > > called strictly in pairs; open_pipe on the first open, release_pipe on > > the last close. That'll make it very easy for the gss code to keep > > track of which pipes gssd is using. > > ...unless the gss code is no longer running. I'm not following you. Note the patch calls ->release_pipe() at close_pipe() time if there are still opens (and then subsequent closes become no-ops). So it does guarantee that there's always a matching call. So my patch description was wrong: "last close" should be something like "last close, or destruction of an opened pipe." I'll fix that. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
