On 02/29/2012 06:34 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> The NFS4CLNT_LAYOUTRECALL tests in pnfs_layout_process and
> pnfs_update_layout are redundant.
>
> In the case of a bulk layout recall, we're always testing for
> the NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL flay anyway.
> In the case of a file or segment recall, the call to
> pnfs_set_layout_stateid() updates the layout_header 'barrier'
> sequence id, which triggers the test in pnfs_layoutgets_blocked()
> and is less race-prone than NFS4CLNT_LAYOUTRECALL anyway.
>
> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfs/pnfs.c | 6 ++----
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/pnfs.c b/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
> index a534216..9c19f92 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/pnfs.c
> @@ -966,8 +966,7 @@ pnfs_update_layout(struct inode *ino,
> }
>
> /* Do we even need to bother with this? */
> - if (test_bit(NFS4CLNT_LAYOUTRECALL, &clp->cl_state) ||
> - test_bit(NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL, &lo->plh_flags)) {
> + if (test_bit(NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL, &lo->plh_flags)) {
> dprintk("%s matches recall, use MDS\n", __func__);
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> @@ -1048,8 +1047,7 @@ pnfs_layout_process(struct nfs4_layoutget *lgp)
> }
>
> spin_lock(&ino->i_lock);
> - if (test_bit(NFS4CLNT_LAYOUTRECALL, &clp->cl_state) ||
> - test_bit(NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL, &lo->plh_flags)) {
This was the only place that the clp structure was used, so you could probably remove it to avoid this warning:
fs/nfs/pnfs.c: In function 'pnfs_layout_process':
fs/nfs/pnfs.c:1058:21: warning: unused variable 'clp' [-Wunused-variable]
- Bryan
> + if (test_bit(NFS_LAYOUT_BULK_RECALL, &lo->plh_flags)) {
> dprintk("%s forget reply due to recall\n", __func__);
> goto out_forget_reply;
> }
--
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
