On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 10:51:27AM -0700, dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >On 6/28/21 1:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>
> >>where ->fl_expire_lock is a new lock callback with second
> >>argument "check"
> >>where:
> >>
> >> check = 1 means: just check whether this lock could be freed
>
> Why do we need this, is there a use case for it? can we just always try
> to expire the lock and return success/fail?
We can't expire the client while holding the flc_lock. And once we drop
that lock we need to restart the loop. Clearly we can't do that every
time.
(So, my code was wrong, it should have been:
if (fl->fl_lops->fl_expire_lock(fl, 1)) {
spin_unlock(&ct->flc_lock);
fl->fl_lops->fl_expire_locks(fl, 0);
goto retry;
}
)
But the 1 and 0 cases are starting to look pretty different; maybe they
should be two different callbacks.
--b.
