From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockd: fix race in nlm_release() Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:49:29 -0500 Message-ID: <20080220234929.GO30160@fieldses.org> References: <20080220191153.GG30160@fieldses.org> <1203535466.15034.5.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20080220192759.GI30160@fieldses.org> <1203536918.15034.11.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <022C8A98-7487-475C-AD9C-89DDB2B1252C@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Trond Myklebust , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:44435 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757257AbYBTXti (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:49:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: <022C8A98-7487-475C-AD9C-89DDB2B1252C@oracle.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 05:10:24PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: > On Feb 20, 2008, at 2:48 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> Just the usual plea to replace the host->h_server flag with 2 separate >> lists: one list of client nlm_hosts, and one list of server >> nlm_hosts :-) > > I have no objection to that, but my NLM IPv6 patches will be > significantly affected by such a change right at this point. Can we > hold off until the IPv6 work is integrated, or make this change part of > the IPv6 work itself? Just speak up before I try to merge it, and we'll work something out.... --b.