Return-Path: Sender: Anna Schumaker Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] NFS: nfs_rename() - revalidate directories on -ERESTARTSYS To: Benjamin Coddington , Jeff Layton Cc: Trond Myklebust , Anna Schumaker , mszeredi@redhat.com, bfields@redhat.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org References: <32ef5d3ded4fe75bb6fc6e1a1aebdd0297257d9e.1497541002.git.bcodding@redhat.com> <1497550694.4607.10.camel@redhat.com> <1497553607.4607.13.camel@poochiereds.net> <4D7B208E-553B-4170-8081-12DE3881A04C@redhat.com> <1497558869.4607.15.camel@redhat.com> From: Anna Schumaker Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 17:06:48 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-ID: On 06/15/2017 04:57 PM, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > On 15 Jun 2017, at 16:34, Jeff Layton wrote: > >> Yeah, I think a smp_wmb() there, paired with the implied barrier in the >> atomic_dec_and_test in rpc_put_task? > > Yes, that should do it. > >>>>> No need for a whole int for a flag and these do get allocated. Make >>>>> it a >>>>> bool? >>> >>> or >>> >>> unsigned int : 1 >>> >>> which seems to be often used -- see nfs4_opendata. The cancelled flag >>> could >>> be changed there as well I suppose. >> >> I'd prefer a bool, but it's really up to Trond and Anna, I suppose. > > If Anna or Trond will tell us how they'd like it, I can follow up with a > patch to make them all consistent. My preference is for a bool Anna > > Ben > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >