On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Steve Dickson <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 29/07/14 15:52, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> Let's just move up the test for "pos->rpc_ops != new->rpc_ops", >> "pos->cl_minorversion != new->cl_minorversion" and "pos->cl_proto != >> new->cl_proto" so that they all happen before we try to test the value >> of cl_cons_state. >> As far as I can tell, all those values are guaranteed to be set as >> part of the struct nfs_client allocators, before we ever put the >> result on the cl_share_link list. > > The check for > if (pos->cl_cons_state > NFS_CS_READY) > > then right after that check is: > > if (pos->cl_cons_state != NFS_CS_READY) > continue; > > confuses me... Is the second check even needed? > > steved. Yes. The result of the lease_recovery could be that the nfs_client is left in a state of error if, say, we get a NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE beastie. Cheers Trond -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@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
