MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOQ4uxjQdLrZXkpP30Pq_=Cckcb=mADrEwQUXmsG92r-gn2y5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <379106947f859bdf5db4c6f9c4ab8c44f7423c08.camel@kernel.org>
 <CAOQ4uxgewN=j3ju5MSowEvwhK1HqKG3n1hBRUQTi1W5asaO1dQ@mail.gmail.com> <20190208155052.GB20573@fieldses.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190208155052.GB20573@fieldses.org>
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Feb 2019 22:02:43 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxg9NGPRpMZt0KgH9HUKMRpn0dFta7EnP1WioRb917n4+A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Better interop for NFS/SMB file share mode/reservation
To:     "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>, Volker.Lendecke@sernet.de,
        samba-technical@lists.samba.org,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Pavel Shilovsky <piastryyy@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:51 PM J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:45:46PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > - check_conflicting_open() is changed to use inode_is_open_for_read()
> >   instead of checking d_count and i_count.
>
> Independently of the rest, I'd love to do away with those
> d_count/i_count checks.  What's inode_is_open_for_read()?
>

It would look maybe something like this:

static inline bool file_is_open_for_read(const struct inode *file)
{
        struct inode *inode = file_inode(file);
        int countself = (file->f_mode & (FMODE_READ | FMODE_WRITE)) ==
FMODE_READ) ? 1 : 0;

        return atomic_read(&inode->i_readcount) > countself;
}

And it would allow for acquiring F_WRLCK lease if other
instances of inode are open O_PATH.
A slight change of semantics that seems harmless(?)
and will allow some flexibility.

But if samba can't figure out a way to keep a single open file
descriptor for oplocks per client-file, then this model doesn't
help us make any progress.

Thanks,
Amir.