On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 01:04:56PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 06:43:29PM -0400, Dai Ngo wrote:
> > +struct nfsd4_ssc_umount;
> >
> > enum {
> > /* cache misses due only to checksum comparison failures */
> > @@ -176,6 +177,10 @@ struct nfsd_net {
> > unsigned int longest_chain_cachesize;
> >
> > struct shrinker nfsd_reply_cache_shrinker;
> > +
> > + spinlock_t nfsd_ssc_lock;
> > + struct nfsd4_ssc_umount *nfsd_ssc_umount;
> ...
>
> > +void nfsd4_ssc_init_umount_work(struct nfsd_net *nn)
> > +{
> > + nn->nfsd_ssc_umount = kzalloc(sizeof(struct nfsd4_ssc_umount),
> > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!nn->nfsd_ssc_umount)
> > + return;
>
> Is there any reason this needs to be allocated dynamically? Let's just
> embed it in nfsd_net.
>
> Actually, I'm not convinced the separate structure definition's really
> that helpful:
>
> > +struct nfsd4_ssc_umount {
> > + struct list_head nsu_list;
> > + unsigned long nsu_expire;
Also: doesn't look like nsu_expire is actually used. Am I missing
something, or is this a leftover from the conversion to the using the
laundromat thread?
--b.
> > + wait_queue_head_t nsu_waitq;
> > +};
>
> How about just:
>
> struct nfsd_net {
> ...
> /* tracking server-to-server copy mounts: */
> spinlock_t nfsd_ssc_lock;
> struct list_head nfsd_ssc_mount_list;
> unsigned long nfsd_ssc_mount_expire;
> wait_queeu_head_t nfsd_ssc_mount_waitq;
>
> or something along those lines?
>
> --b.
