Return-Path: Received: from mail4.gandi.net ([217.70.183.210]:59699 "EHLO gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932797AbbGJPHG (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:07:06 -0400 Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 17:06:59 +0200 From: William Dauchy To: Jeff Layton Cc: William Dauchy , Linux NFS mailing list , Trond Myklebust , jloup@gandi.net Subject: Re: extra reference to fl->fl_file, possible regression Message-ID: <20150710150659.GP15144@gandi.net> References: <20150710092910.GI15144@gandi.net> <20150710072438.08b3417a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20150710125444.GL15144@gandi.net> <20150710103914.78189580@tlielax.poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HrsILUyxNtiOryfc" In-Reply-To: <20150710103914.78189580@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --HrsILUyxNtiOryfc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul10 10:39, Jeff Layton wrote: > So if a file happened to have some flock locks on it, then we could > be taking a new reference to a file that has already had its refcount > go to zero. do you have any test case which may confirm that? in the commit messages, you also were refering to some tests; I wonder if you could share it. --=20 William --HrsILUyxNtiOryfc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlWf35MACgkQ1I6eqOUidQHuKgCcDEV6Vs/rE+m6+diDnYujv0pu k88AnAnddCCmDOfjrkJ/I0nDmF+0qB96 =vagU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HrsILUyxNtiOryfc--