Re: [PATCH v2 018/117] nfsd: clean up nfs4_release_lockowner

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 28 Jun 2014 23:47:38 -0700
Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 03:11:58PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > Now that we know that we won't have several lockowners with the same,
> > owner->data, we can simplify nfs4_release_lockowner and get rid of
> > the lo_list in the process.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> >  fs/nfsd/state.h     |  1 -
> >  2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > index 00a1b2cda3ab..a5bb96b97f09 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> > @@ -4828,7 +4828,7 @@ nfsd4_release_lockowner(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> >  			struct nfsd4_release_lockowner *rlockowner)
> >  {
> >  	clientid_t *clid = &rlockowner->rl_clientid;
> > -	struct nfs4_stateowner *sop;
> > +	struct nfs4_stateowner *sop = NULL, *tmp;
> >  	struct nfs4_lockowner *lo;
> >  	struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp;
> >  	struct xdr_netobj *owner = &rlockowner->rl_owner;
> > @@ -4849,31 +4849,31 @@ nfsd4_release_lockowner(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> >  	status = nfserr_locks_held;
> >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&matches);
> 
> I think matches is unused now.
> 

Yep -- good catch.

> >  
> > +	/* Find the matching lock stateowner */
> > +	list_for_each_entry(tmp, &nn->ownerstr_hashtbl[hashval], so_strhash) {
> > +		if (tmp->so_is_open_owner)
> > +			continue;
> > +		if (same_owner_str(tmp, owner, clid)) {
> > +			sop = tmp;
> > +			break;
> >  		}
> >  	}
> > +
> > +	/* No matching owner found, maybe a replay? Just declare victory... */
> > +	if (!sop) {
> > +		status = nfs_ok;
> > +		goto out;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	lo = lockowner(sop);
> > +	/* see if there are still any locks associated with it */
> > +	list_for_each_entry(stp, &sop->so_stateids, st_perstateowner) {
> > +		if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lo))
> > +			goto out;
> >  	}
> > +
> > +	status = nfs_ok;
> > +	release_lockowner(lo);
> 
> I would seem simpler to do all the work in the loop, something like:
> 
> 	list_for_each_entry(sop, &nn->ownerstr_hashtbl[hashval], so_strhash) {
> 		if (sop->so_is_open_owner)
> 			continue;
> 		if (!same_owner_str(sop, owner, clid))
> 			continue;
> 
> 		list_for_each_entry(stp, &sop->so_stateids, st_perstateowner) {
> 			if (check_for_locks(stp->st_file, lockowner(sop))) {
> 				status = nfserr_locks_held;
> 				goto out;
> 			}
> 		}
> 
> 		release_lockowner(lo);
> 		break;
> 	}
> 

Ok, sure...

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux