On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:57:02AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Depends on what you mean by "normal case". For v4.0 we do look it up at > least once for each call into here. For v4.1 we get the pointer to the > client "for free" by virtue of looking up the session in the SEQUENCE > op. So, I think we are doing a bit more than just verifying the > clientid here. The name seems appropriate to me. So everything but the first call for 4.0 is just a small verification. I'm not going to hold up the series for something as trivial, but the name still smells a little.. > > While it doesn't belong into this patch: why don't we cache the > > nfsd_net in the nfsd4_compound_state > > > > I'll go further and say that it doesn't really belong in this series. Anything we can keep out of this series is good, agreed.. > There are certain calls that don't require a SEQUENCE operation: > > BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION > EXCHANGE_ID > CREATE_SESSION > DESTROY_SESSION > > Granted, for those we don't use lookup_clientid but the "Usually" still > applies, in general. That said, if it bothers you I'll remove it. my major issue is the combination of the usually with this: > > > + * if we don't have one cached already then we know this is for > > > + * is for v4.0 and "sessions" will be false. so we can have a case where we are 4.1 but don't have a cached session. This is getting into deep nitpick land, but comments that aren't entirely coherent always confuse me. -- 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
