On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 12:53 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > It also means that you're calling twice down > > into the filesystem for every call to may_open() (once for > > vfs_permission() and once for break_lease()) and 3 times in > > do_sys_truncate(). > > > > Would it perhaps make sense to package up the call to vfs_permission() > > and break_lease() as a single 'may_open()' inode operation that could be > > called by may_open(), do_sys_truncate() and nfsd? > > Could be, but this may no longer make sense when we try to do > lease-breaking on rename and unlink.
Hmm... Clustered lease breaking on rename and unlink really needs to be done _atomically_ with the actual operation. It really needs to be done inside the ->rename() and ->unlink() operation because only the filesystem can guarantee atomicity. Thinking about it, perhaps the may_open() thing is wrong too: again, you have atomicity requirements inside the open() call. A break_lease() inode operation won't help either... Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
