On 5/18/21 10:21 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
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?
Yes, will be cleaned up in v6.
-Dai
--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.
