From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] nfsd: Remove nfsfh.h dependency on sunrpc Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:57:23 -0500 Message-ID: <20091125205723.GM32502@fieldses.org> References: <4B0AB039.6020608@panasas.com> <1258991910-25335-1-git-send-email-bharrosh@panasas.com> <20091123221705.GF8534@fieldses.org> <4B0B994B.10108@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Benny Halevy , NFS list , pNFS Mailing List , Trond Myklebust , Andrew Morton , linux-fsdevel , Al Viro , Randy Dunlap To: Boaz Harrosh Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B0B994B.10108@panasas.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:28:59AM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 11/24/2009 12:17 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 05:58:30PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > >> linux/nfsd/nfsfh.h defines some low level types which > >> are needed by exportfs and though by filesystems. > >> > >> In the file, fh_lock() uses the sunrpc dprint facility which > >> might cause a dependency of exportfs (and filesystems) on > > > > "might cause"? > > > > Does mere inclusion of this .h (without referencing fh_lock_nested() or > > its callers) actually create a dependency? > > > > --b. > > > > No, only if code actually uses fh_lock_nested it will cause a dependency. > Which is only used in fs/nfsd/... > > But I would like to discourage nfsd/debug.h at this level. > > Should I move fh_lock_nested() and it's siblings to the new private vfs.h header > you made, and get rid of it this way? Sure, that sounds reasonable. --b.