Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:38187 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752293Ab0KARll (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:41:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:41:22 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "J. Bruce Fields" , Linus Torvalds , Arnd Bergmann , Bryan Schumaker , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] locks: fix leaks on setlease errors Message-ID: <20101101174122.GA12604@infradead.org> References: <20101030212500.GE480@fieldses.org> <1288474276-14288-2-git-send-email-bfields@redhat.com> <20101031111057.GA23760@infradead.org> <20101101172440.GC2340@fieldses.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20101101172440.GC2340@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 01:24:40PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > I also have patches that get rid of fl_release_private, fl_mylease, and > (almost done) fl_change. > > Unless you've a better suggestion I'll probably send them out for review > and then queue them up with other nfsd changes for 2.6.38. Sounds good. I was also wondering if we can get rid of ->setlease entirely. The file_lock_operations should be enough abstraction to reject the leases in theory, but I need to look into it a bit more.