Return-Path: Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:37588 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751745Ab1BFTlx convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2011 14:41:53 -0500 Received: by bwz15 with SMTP id 15so4317756bwz.19 for ; Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:41:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1296855242-2592-1-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-2-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-3-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-4-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-5-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-6-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-7-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-8-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-9-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-10-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-11-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-12-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-13-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-14-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-15-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-16-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-17-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-18-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-19-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-20-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-21-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-22-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-23-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> <1296855242-2592-24-git-send-email-andros@netapp.com> Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 14:41:52 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/40] SQUASHME pnfs-submit wave3 new function for ds expired lease From: Fred Isaman To: "William A. (Andy) Adamson" Cc: bhalevy@panasas.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 11:46 AM, William A. (Andy) Adamson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Fred Isaman wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:33 PM, ? wrote: >>> From: Andy Adamson >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Andy Adamson >>> --- >>> ?fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | ? 11 ++++++++--- >>> ?1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c >>> index 9c50be7..fb22cbf 100644 >>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c >>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c >>> @@ -1574,7 +1574,7 @@ static int _nfs4_proc_open(struct nfs4_opendata *data) >>> ? ? ? ?return 0; >>> ?} >>> >>> -int nfs4_recover_expired_lease(struct nfs_client *clp) >>> +static int nfs4_client_recover_expired_lease(struct nfs_client *clp) >>> ?{ >>> ? ? ? ?unsigned int loop; >>> ? ? ? ?int ret; >>> @@ -1593,6 +1593,11 @@ int nfs4_recover_expired_lease(struct nfs_client *clp) >>> ?} >>> ?EXPORT_SYMBOL(nfs4_recover_expired_lease); >>> >>> +static int nfs4_recover_expired_lease(struct nfs_server *server) >>> +{ >>> + ? ? ? return nfs4_client_recover_expired_lease(server->nfs_client); >>> +} >>> + >> >> Why are we doing this extra indirection? > > As Trond pointed out, it is a lot less intrusive to the existing code. > > -->Andy > I must be missing something. What I see is that you are changing the arguments to a function that is called exactly twice, and creating a totally unnecessary subfunction nfs4_client_recover_expired_lease. How is this less intrusive than just directly inlining nfs4_client_recover_expired_lease? Fred