On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:39:23PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: > 16.11.2012 20:58, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx пишет: > > > >A patch follows: note it's a two-line patch, with 20 lines of changelog > >showing that I looked at what state might be shared by other threads and > >explaining why I think this is safe. > > > > Acked-by: Stanislav Kinsburskiy <skinsbursky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >I think that's what we need to do: little patches that remove it from > >one or another part of the code with careful explanation of why it > >works. > > > > Yes, thanks. I'll also try to simplify nfsd_open() by little patches. > In general it looks like client_mutex protect two different things: > open owner state (which is containerised already, actually) and > files access. > So, probably, this client mutex have to be converted into two: > per-net one, which protects open owner state, and static one, which > protects files operations. > What do you think about it? That sounds right. --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
