> On May 23, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-05-23 at 17:25 +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote: >> >>> On May 23, 2022, at 12:37 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> His suggestion was just to keep a counter in the lockowner of how many >>> locks are associated with it. That seems like a good suggestion, though >>> you'd probably need to add a parameter to lm_get_owner to indicate >>> whether you were adding a new lock or just doing a conflock copy. >> >> locks_copy_conflock() would need to take a boolean parameter >> that callers would set when they actually manipulate a lock. >> > > Yep. You'd also have to add a bool arg to lm_put_owner so that you know > whether you need to decrement the counter. It's the lm_put_owner() side that looks less than straightforward. Suggestions and advice welcome there. -- Chuck Lever
