Re: [PATCH v3 8/9] nfs: move nfs4 lock retry attempt loop to a separate function

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

 



> On Sep 16, 2016, at 16:27, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> This also consolidates the waiting logic into a single function,
> instead of having it spread across two like it is now.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> index c807850ac476..a7517abaf3c7 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> @@ -5530,22 +5530,6 @@ int nfs4_proc_delegreturn(struct inode *inode, struct rpc_cred *cred, const nfs4
> 	return err;
> }
> 
> -#define NFS4_LOCK_MINTIMEOUT (1 * HZ)
> -#define NFS4_LOCK_MAXTIMEOUT (30 * HZ)
> -
> -/* 
> - * sleep, with exponential backoff, and retry the LOCK operation. 
> - */
> -static unsigned long
> -nfs4_set_lock_task_retry(unsigned long timeout)
> -{
> -	freezable_schedule_timeout_interruptible(timeout);
> -	timeout <<= 1;
> -	if (timeout > NFS4_LOCK_MAXTIMEOUT)
> -		return NFS4_LOCK_MAXTIMEOUT;
> -	return timeout;
> -}
> -
> static int _nfs4_proc_getlk(struct nfs4_state *state, int cmd, struct file_lock *request)
> {
> 	struct inode *inode = state->inode;
> @@ -6178,12 +6162,34 @@ static int nfs4_proc_setlk(struct nfs4_state *state, int cmd, struct file_lock *
> 	return err;
> }
> 
> +#define NFS4_LOCK_MINTIMEOUT (1 * HZ)
> +#define NFS4_LOCK_MAXTIMEOUT (30 * HZ)
> +
> +static int
> +nfs4_retry_setlk(struct nfs4_state *state, int cmd, struct file_lock *request)
> +{
> +	int status;
> +	unsigned long timeout = NFS4_LOCK_MINTIMEOUT;
> +
> +	do {
> +		status = nfs4_proc_setlk(state, cmd, request);
> +		if ((status != -EAGAIN) || IS_SETLK(cmd))
> +			break;
> +		freezable_schedule_timeout_interruptible(timeout);
> +		timeout *= 2;
> +		timeout = min_t(unsigned long, NFS4_LOCK_MAXTIMEOUT, timeout);
> +		status = -ERESTARTSYS;
> +		if (signalled())
> +			break;
> +	} while(status < 0);

Can it ever be >= 0 here? Why not just use 'while (!signalled())'?

> +	return status;
> +}
> +
> static int
> nfs4_proc_lock(struct file *filp, int cmd, struct file_lock *request)
> {
> 	struct nfs_open_context *ctx;
> 	struct nfs4_state *state;
> -	unsigned long timeout = NFS4_LOCK_MINTIMEOUT;
> 	int status;
> 
> 	/* verify open state */
> @@ -6232,16 +6238,7 @@ nfs4_proc_lock(struct file *filp, int cmd, struct file_lock *request)
> 	if (status != 0)
> 		return status;
> 
> -	do {
> -		status = nfs4_proc_setlk(state, cmd, request);
> -		if ((status != -EAGAIN) || IS_SETLK(cmd))
> -			break;
> -		timeout = nfs4_set_lock_task_retry(timeout);
> -		status = -ERESTARTSYS;
> -		if (signalled())
> -			break;
> -	} while(status < 0);
> -	return status;
> +	return nfs4_retry_setlk(state, cmd, request);
> }
> 
> int nfs4_lock_delegation_recall(struct file_lock *fl, struct nfs4_state *state, const nfs4_stateid *stateid)
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

--
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