On Wed, 17 Jan 2024, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Convert __locks_delete_block and __locks_wake_up_blocks to take a struct
> file_lock_core pointer. Note that to accomodate this, we need to add a
> new file_lock() wrapper to go from file_lock_core to file_lock.

Actually we don't need it.... see below.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlay...@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/locks.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index eddf4d767d5d..6b8e8820dec9 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -92,6 +92,11 @@ static inline bool IS_LEASE(struct file_lock_core *flc)
>  
>  #define IS_REMOTELCK(fl)     (fl->fl_core.fl_pid <= 0)
>  
> +struct file_lock *file_lock(struct file_lock_core *flc)
> +{
> +     return container_of(flc, struct file_lock, fl_core);
> +}
> +
>  static bool lease_breaking(struct file_lock *fl)
>  {
>       return fl->fl_core.fl_flags & (FL_UNLOCK_PENDING | 
> FL_DOWNGRADE_PENDING);
> @@ -677,31 +682,35 @@ static void locks_delete_global_blocked(struct 
> file_lock_core *waiter)
>   *
>   * Must be called with blocked_lock_lock held.
>   */
> -static void __locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter)
> +static void __locks_delete_block(struct file_lock_core *waiter)
>  {
> -     locks_delete_global_blocked(&waiter->fl_core);
> -     list_del_init(&waiter->fl_core.fl_blocked_member);
> +     locks_delete_global_blocked(waiter);
> +     list_del_init(&waiter->fl_blocked_member);
>  }
>  
> -static void __locks_wake_up_blocks(struct file_lock *blocker)
> +static void __locks_wake_up_blocks(struct file_lock_core *blocker)
>  {
> -     while (!list_empty(&blocker->fl_core.fl_blocked_requests)) {
> -             struct file_lock *waiter;
> +     while (!list_empty(&blocker->fl_blocked_requests)) {
> +             struct file_lock_core *waiter;
> +             struct file_lock *fl;
> +
> +             waiter = list_first_entry(&blocker->fl_blocked_requests,
> +                                       struct file_lock_core, 
> fl_blocked_member);
>  
> -             waiter = list_first_entry(&blocker->fl_core.fl_blocked_requests,
> -                                       struct file_lock, 
> fl_core.fl_blocked_member);

> +             fl = file_lock(waiter);

                fl = list_first_entry(&blocker->fl_core.fl_blocked_requests,
                                      struct file_lock, 
fl_core.fl_blocked_member);

                waiter = &fl->fl_core;

achieves the same result without needing file_lock().

If you really want to add file_lock() then do so, but you need a better
justification :-)

NeilBrown



>               __locks_delete_block(waiter);
> -             if (waiter->fl_lmops && waiter->fl_lmops->lm_notify)
> -                     waiter->fl_lmops->lm_notify(waiter);
> +             if ((IS_POSIX(waiter) || IS_FLOCK(waiter)) &&
> +                 fl->fl_lmops && fl->fl_lmops->lm_notify)
> +                     fl->fl_lmops->lm_notify(fl);
>               else
> -                     wake_up(&waiter->fl_core.fl_wait);
> +                     wake_up(&waiter->fl_wait);
>  
>               /*
>                * The setting of fl_blocker to NULL marks the "done"
>                * point in deleting a block. Paired with acquire at the top
>                * of locks_delete_block().
>                */
> -             smp_store_release(&waiter->fl_core.fl_blocker, NULL);
> +             smp_store_release(&waiter->fl_blocker, NULL);
>       }
>  }
>  
> @@ -743,8 +752,8 @@ int locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter)
>       spin_lock(&blocked_lock_lock);
>       if (waiter->fl_core.fl_blocker)
>               status = 0;
> -     __locks_wake_up_blocks(waiter);
> -     __locks_delete_block(waiter);
> +     __locks_wake_up_blocks(&waiter->fl_core);
> +     __locks_delete_block(&waiter->fl_core);
>  
>       /*
>        * The setting of fl_blocker to NULL marks the "done" point in deleting
> @@ -799,7 +808,7 @@ static void __locks_insert_block(struct file_lock 
> *blocker,
>        * waiter, but might not conflict with blocker, or the requests
>        * and lock which block it.  So they all need to be woken.
>        */
> -     __locks_wake_up_blocks(waiter);
> +     __locks_wake_up_blocks(&waiter->fl_core);
>  }
>  
>  /* Must be called with flc_lock held. */
> @@ -831,7 +840,7 @@ static void locks_wake_up_blocks(struct file_lock 
> *blocker)
>               return;
>  
>       spin_lock(&blocked_lock_lock);
> -     __locks_wake_up_blocks(blocker);
> +     __locks_wake_up_blocks(&blocker->fl_core);
>       spin_unlock(&blocked_lock_lock);
>  }
>  
> @@ -1186,7 +1195,7 @@ static int posix_lock_inode(struct inode *inode, struct 
> file_lock *request,
>                        * Ensure that we don't find any locks blocked on this
>                        * request during deadlock detection.
>                        */
> -                     __locks_wake_up_blocks(request);
> +                     __locks_wake_up_blocks(&request->fl_core);
>                       if (likely(!posix_locks_deadlock(request, fl))) {
>                               error = FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED;
>                               __locks_insert_block(fl, request,
> 
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 
> 


Reply via email to