Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 08:51:17 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.org, hch@infradead.org,
        cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] locks: clean up vfs_setlease kerneldoc comments
Message-ID: <20140824155117.GC15908@infradead.org>
References: <1408804878-1331-1-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
 <1408804878-1331-5-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <1408804878-1331-5-git-send-email-jlayton@primarydata.com>
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 10:41:12AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Some of the latter paragraphs seem ambiguous and just plain wrong.
> In particular the break_lease comment makes no sense. We call
> break_lease (and break_deleg) from all sorts of vfs-layer functions,
> so there is clearly such a method.
> 
> Also, we are close to being able to allow for "real" filesystem
> setlease methods so remove the final comment about it not being a
> full implementation yet.

I'd remove even more:

> + *
> + * This will call the filesystem's setlease file method, if defined. Note that
> + * there is no getlease method; instead, the filesystem setlease method should
> + * call back to generic_setlease() to add a lease to the inode's lease list,
> + * where fcntl_getlease() can find it.  Since fcntl_getlease() only reports
> + * whether the current task holds a lease, a cluster filesystem need only do
> + * this for leases held by processes on this node.
>   */

If we'd ever want a full implementation I think we'd absolutely need
the getlease method.  But instead of hypothetizing about future
implementation I'd rather leave it to those actually implementing such
support, if that ever happens.