On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 13:39 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> this field is not used in any important way and probably should
> have been removed by
>
> Commit: 8003d3c4aaa5 ("nfs4: treat lock owners as opaque values")
>
> which removed the pid argument from nfs4_get_lock_state.
>
> Except in unusual and uninteresting cases, two threads with the same
> ->tgid will have the same ->files pointer, so keeping them both
> for comparison brings no benefit.
>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfs/inode.c | 3 ---
> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 1 -
> fs/nfs/pagelist.c | 3 +--
> fs/nfs/write.c | 3 +--
> include/linux/nfs_fs.h | 1 -
> 5 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/inode.c b/fs/nfs/inode.c
> index bf4ec5ecc97e..1752fc7c0024 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/inode.c
> @@ -703,7 +703,6 @@ static void nfs_init_lock_context(struct nfs_lock_context *l_ctx)
> {
> atomic_set(&l_ctx->count, 1);
> l_ctx->lockowner.l_owner = current->files;
> - l_ctx->lockowner.l_pid = current->tgid;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&l_ctx->list);
> atomic_set(&l_ctx->io_count, 0);
> }
> @@ -716,8 +715,6 @@ static struct nfs_lock_context *__nfs_find_lock_context(struct nfs_open_context
> do {
> if (pos->lockowner.l_owner != current->files)
> continue;
> - if (pos->lockowner.l_pid != current->tgid)
> - continue;
> atomic_inc(&pos->count);
> return pos;
> } while ((pos = list_entry(pos->list.next, typeof(*pos), list)) != head);
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> index 0e327528a3ce..b7df3ef84fc3 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> @@ -2766,7 +2766,6 @@ static int _nfs4_do_setattr(struct inode *inode,
> } else if (truncate && state != NULL) {
> struct nfs_lockowner lockowner = {
> .l_owner = current->files,
> - .l_pid = current->tgid,
> };
> if (!nfs4_valid_open_stateid(state))
> return -EBADF;
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/pagelist.c b/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> index 965db474f4b0..161f8b13bbaa 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/pagelist.c
> @@ -867,8 +867,7 @@ static void nfs_pageio_cleanup_mirroring(struct nfs_pageio_descriptor *pgio)
> static bool nfs_match_lock_context(const struct nfs_lock_context *l1,
> const struct nfs_lock_context *l2)
> {
> - return l1->lockowner.l_owner == l2->lockowner.l_owner
> - && l1->lockowner.l_pid == l2->lockowner.l_pid;
> + return l1->lockowner.l_owner == l2->lockowner.l_owner;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/write.c b/fs/nfs/write.c
> index 53211838f72a..4d5897e6d6cb 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/write.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/write.c
> @@ -1151,8 +1151,7 @@ int nfs_flush_incompatible(struct file *file, struct page *page)
> if (l_ctx && flctx &&
> !(list_empty_careful(&flctx->flc_posix) &&
> list_empty_careful(&flctx->flc_flock))) {
> - do_flush |= l_ctx->lockowner.l_owner != current->files
> - || l_ctx->lockowner.l_pid != current->tgid;
> + do_flush |= l_ctx->lockowner.l_owner != current->files;
> }
> nfs_release_request(req);
> if (!do_flush)
> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs_fs.h b/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
> index 810124b33327..bf8a713c45b4 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
> @@ -57,7 +57,6 @@ struct nfs_access_entry {
>
> struct nfs_lockowner {
> fl_owner_t l_owner;
> - pid_t l_pid;
> };
>
> struct nfs_lock_context {
>
>
Looks ok. For my own knowledge though, in what situations would you have
the same files pointer but a different tgid?
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
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
