[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-cifs
Subject:    Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Prepare byte-range locking code for future SMB2 usage
From:       Pavel Shilovsky <piastry () etersoft ! ru>
Date:       2012-03-28 16:48:19
Message-ID: CAKywueRbrBLnEieD+D10nBwK6X5WY1tPNNRXU0fSH4L8i3pC4A () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

27 марта 2012 г. 22:00 пользователь Pavel Shilovsky
<piastry@etersoft.ru> написал:
> 27 марта 2012 г. 15:00 пользователь Pavel Shilovsky
> <piastry@etersoft.ru> написал:
>> 26 марта 2012 г. 22:48 пользователь Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> написал:
>>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:17:46 +0300
>>> Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@etersoft.ru> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is one of the preparation step that makes the byte-range locking code more
>>>> protocol independent.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I sat down to review this set today, but found it very difficult to
>>> do so. Most of these patches have little to no explanation or
>>> justification at all. Terseness is not a virtue when it come to patch
>>> descriptions:
>>>
>>>> Pavel Shilovsky (6):
>>>>   CIFS: Move locks to file structure
>>> ^^^
>>> That's all that patch says. No explanation of *why* you're moving those
>>> to the file structure -- whatever that is. Do you mean cifsFileInfo here?
>>>
>>>>   CIFS: Fix VFS locks usage
>>>
>>> This one says:
>>>
>>> Surround VFS posix_lock_file_wait calls with CIFS lock_mutex
>>> where it needs.
>>>
>>> ...so you're saying that the existing code is broken? Or is it only a
>>> problem for SMB2 support? Does a fix need to go to stable?
>>>
>>>>   CIFS: Convert lock type to 32 bit variable
>>>>   CIFS: Separate protocol specific lock type handling
>>>>   CIFS: Separate protocol specific part from getlk
>>>>   CIFS: Separate protocol specific part from setlk
>>>>
>>>>  fs/cifs/cifsfs.c   |    1 -
>>>>  fs/cifs/cifsglob.h |    5 +-
>>>>  fs/cifs/file.c     |  250 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>>>>  3 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Given that it's not clear to me what the goal of this patchset is, not
>>> to mention the lack of any description on these patches, I can't
>>> reasonably review this.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry - forgot to add proper descriptions for these two patches - will
>> repost asap.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Pavel Shilovsky.
>
> rebased cifs-patches branch
> (http://git.altlinux.org/people/piastry/public/?p=cifs-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/cifs-patches)
> and smb2-3.4 branch
> (http://git.altlinux.org/people/piastry/public/?p=cifs-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/smb2-3.4)
> on top of the current Steve's master for an easier review.

updated branches according to he new version of VFS lock usage fix.

-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]