Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com ([209.85.220.177]:42180 "EHLO mail-vc0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754922AbbBTQWu (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:22:50 -0500 Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id hy10so3246167vcb.8 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:22:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150220161903.GA17874@infradead.org> References: <1424448985.3641.1.camel@primarydata.com> <20150220161903.GA17874@infradead.org> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:22:48 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client updates From: Trond Myklebust To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 08:16:25AM -0800, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> NFS: struct nfs_commit_info.lock must always point to inode->i_lock > > Is there any point in even keeping that lock pointer around then? We either have to pass a pointer to the lock or to the inode itself. I'm fine with either, but I figured the more conservative option would be keeping what we have now. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@primarydata.com