On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/08/2010 01:34 AM, andros@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> From: Andy Adamson <andros@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Adamson <andros@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 2 ++
>> fs/nfs/pnfs.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>> fs/nfs/pnfs.h | 1 +
>> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> index 6acebc3..f763746 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> @@ -5565,6 +5565,8 @@ static void pnfs_layoutcommit_release(void *lcdata)
>> struct pnfs_layoutcommit_data *data =
>> (struct pnfs_layoutcommit_data *)lcdata;
>>
>> + /* Matched by get_layout in pnfs_layoutcommit_inode */
>> + put_layout(data->args.inode);
>> put_rpccred(data->cred);
>> pnfs_layoutcommit_free(lcdata);
>> }
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/pnfs.c b/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
>> index aa16e5d..d42c5da 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
>> @@ -354,6 +354,15 @@ put_layout_locked(struct pnfs_layout_type *lo)
>> }
>>
>> void
>> +put_layout(struct inode *inode)
>> +{
>> + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
>> + put_layout_locked(NFS_I(inode)->layout);
>> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
>> +
>> +}
>> +
>> +void
>> pnfs_layout_release(struct pnfs_layout_type *lo,
>> struct nfs4_pnfs_layout_segment *range)
>> {
>> @@ -1598,6 +1607,9 @@ pnfs_layoutcommit_inode(struct inode *inode, int sync)
>> __clear_bit(NFS_INO_LAYOUTCOMMIT, &nfsi->layout->pnfs_layout_state);
>> pnfs_get_layout_stateid(&data->args.stateid, nfsi->layout);
>>
>> + /* Reference for layoutcommit matched in pnfs_layoutcommit_release */
>> + get_layout(NFS_I(inode)->layout);
>> +
>
> Has of your rules this should be now called get_layout_locked
OK
>
>> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
>>
>> /* Set up layout commit args */
>> @@ -1606,6 +1618,7 @@ pnfs_layoutcommit_inode(struct inode *inode, int sync)
>> if (status) {
>> /* The layout driver failed to setup the layoutcommit */
>> put_rpccred(data->cred);
>> + put_layout(inode);
>
> And it is really nice that put_layout takes an inode and get_layout takes an
> struct layout_type.
>
>> goto out_free;
>> }
>> status = pnfs4_proc_layoutcommit(data, sync);
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/pnfs.h b/fs/nfs/pnfs.h
>> index 9b0fed4..e04b9d4 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/pnfs.h
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/pnfs.h
>> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ void pnfs_layout_release(struct pnfs_layout_type *, struct nfs4_pnfs_layout_segm
>> void pnfs_set_layout_stateid(struct pnfs_layout_type *lo,
>> const nfs4_stateid *stateid);
>> void pnfs_destroy_layout(struct nfs_inode *);
>> +void put_layout(struct inode *inode);
>>
>> #define PNFS_EXISTS_LDIO_OP(srv, opname) ((srv)->pnfs_curr_ld && \
>> (srv)->pnfs_curr_ld->ld_io_ops && \
>
> I still think they can all go away.
> What is the point of a layout without it's nfsi+inode. And who cares if we free the layout_type structure
> 2 milliseconds before, and in the error case?
>
> Boaz
> --
> 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
>
--
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
