Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <c069bb1b0ec50358fc4d093ebd7482c7484d77b4.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v12 1/3] fs/lock: add new callback,
 lm_lock_conflict, to lock_manager_operations
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To:     "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc:     Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@oracle.com>, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Thu, 10 Feb 2022 09:29:12 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20220210142143.GC21434@fieldses.org>
References: <1644468729-30383-1-git-send-email-dai.ngo@oracle.com>
         <1644468729-30383-2-git-send-email-dai.ngo@oracle.com>
         <20220210142143.GC21434@fieldses.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.3 (3.42.3-1.fc35) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2022-02-10 at 09:21 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> Jeff, this table of locking rules seems out of date since 6109c85037e5
> "locks: add a dedicated spinlock to protect i_flctx lists".  Are any of
> those callbacks still called with the i_lock?  Should that column be
> labeled "flc_lock" instead?  Or is that even still useful information?
> 
> --b.


Yeah, that should probably be the flc_lock. I don't think we protect
anything in the file locking code with the i_lock anymore.

> 
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 08:52:07PM -0800, Dai Ngo wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst
> > index d36fe79167b3..57ce0fbc8ab1 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst
> > @@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ prototypes::
> >  	void (*lm_break)(struct file_lock *); /* break_lease callback */
> >  	int (*lm_change)(struct file_lock **, int);
> >  	bool (*lm_breaker_owns_lease)(struct file_lock *);
> > +	bool (*lm_lock_conflict)(struct file_lock *);
> >  
> >  locking rules:
> >  
> > @@ -450,6 +451,7 @@ lm_grant:		no		no			no
> >  lm_break:		yes		no			no
> >  lm_change		yes		no			no
> >  lm_breaker_owns_lease:	no		no			no
> > +lm_lock_conflict:       no		no			no
> >  ======================	=============	=================	=========
> 

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>