Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1669043
| From | "Benjamin Coddington" <bcodding@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/locks: Use fs-specific l_pid for remote locks |
| Date | 2017-06-19 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tU4rD-2KP-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tPtAl-5iT-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPtAm-5iT-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPHDk-64E-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tU48j-2E1-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 19 Jun 2017, at 8:37, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > Apologies for the delayed response.. > > On 7 Jun 2017, at 7:40, Jeff Layton wrote: > >> On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 16:45 -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote: >>> Now that we're translating fl_pid for F_GETLK and /proc/locks, we need to >>> handle the case where a remote filesystem directly sets fl_pid. In that >>> case, the fl_pid should not be translated into a local pid namespace. If >>> the filesystem implements the lock operation, set a flag to return the >>> lock's fl_pid value directly, rather translate it. >>> >> >> Actually, you're not translating anything for F_GETLK until we get to >> this patch. Patch #2 in this series removes the fl_nspid field, but the >> pid translation isn't fixed until here. That does mean a nominal >> regression here in how fl_pid is reported between the two. > > Good catch. > >> Would it be best to squash #2 and #3 together? Or maybe just go ahead >> and universally translate the fl_pid field until you add the flag in >> this patch? > > I'll send a v4 that universally translates the fl_pid field until this > patch. I think the first two patches should be separate. Ah, but /2 and 3/ should just be squashed, yes I agree with that. Ben
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/locks: Use fs-specific l_pid for remote locks "Benjamin Coddington" <bcodding@redhat.com> - 2017-06-19 14:40 +0200 Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/locks: Use fs-specific l_pid for remote locks "Benjamin Coddington" <bcodding@redhat.com> - 2017-06-19 15:00 +0200
csiph-web