Re: [Cluster-devel] [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 01:16:32PM -0400, Bob Peterson wrote: > - Original Message - > > On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 10:43:13AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:20:10 -0700 > > > Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > While doing a bit of adding argument names to fs.h, > > > > I looked at lm_grant and it seems the 2nd argument > > > > is always NULL. > > > > > > > > How about removing it? > > > > > > > > This doesn't apply as it depends on some other patches > > > > but it should be clear enough... > > > > > > > > > > ACK on the general idea from my standpoint. Anything that simplifies > > > the file locking interfaces is a good thing, particularly the deferred > > > locking code. > > > > Fine with me. I'd be happy to remove all the deferred locking code from > > dlm; it never really worked. > GFS2 uses deferred locks, at the very least in its direct_io path > (gfs2_direct_IO in aops.c). So AFAIK we can't remove THAT without a certain > amount of pain. Steve is on vacation / holiday this week, but he will > be back on Thursday and Friday (which is a holiday). This is about deferred file locks from NFS, not gfs2's "deferred" lock mode. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Cluster-devel] [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant
- Original Message - > On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 10:43:13AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:20:10 -0700 > > Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > While doing a bit of adding argument names to fs.h, > > > I looked at lm_grant and it seems the 2nd argument > > > is always NULL. > > > > > > How about removing it? > > > > > > This doesn't apply as it depends on some other patches > > > but it should be clear enough... > > > > > > > ACK on the general idea from my standpoint. Anything that simplifies > > the file locking interfaces is a good thing, particularly the deferred > > locking code. > > Fine with me. I'd be happy to remove all the deferred locking code from > dlm; it never really worked. > > Dave Hi, GFS2 uses deferred locks, at the very least in its direct_io path (gfs2_direct_IO in aops.c). So AFAIK we can't remove THAT without a certain amount of pain. Steve is on vacation / holiday this week, but he will be back on Thursday and Friday (which is a holiday). I'm all for getting rid of useless parameters, and I've done so on several occasions in GFS2. Regards, Bob Peterson Red Hat File Systems -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Cluster-devel] [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant
- Original Message - On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 10:43:13AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:20:10 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: While doing a bit of adding argument names to fs.h, I looked at lm_grant and it seems the 2nd argument is always NULL. How about removing it? This doesn't apply as it depends on some other patches but it should be clear enough... ACK on the general idea from my standpoint. Anything that simplifies the file locking interfaces is a good thing, particularly the deferred locking code. Fine with me. I'd be happy to remove all the deferred locking code from dlm; it never really worked. Dave Hi, GFS2 uses deferred locks, at the very least in its direct_io path (gfs2_direct_IO in aops.c). So AFAIK we can't remove THAT without a certain amount of pain. Steve is on vacation / holiday this week, but he will be back on Thursday and Friday (which is a holiday). I'm all for getting rid of useless parameters, and I've done so on several occasions in GFS2. Regards, Bob Peterson Red Hat File Systems -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Cluster-devel] [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 01:16:32PM -0400, Bob Peterson wrote: - Original Message - On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 10:43:13AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:20:10 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: While doing a bit of adding argument names to fs.h, I looked at lm_grant and it seems the 2nd argument is always NULL. How about removing it? This doesn't apply as it depends on some other patches but it should be clear enough... ACK on the general idea from my standpoint. Anything that simplifies the file locking interfaces is a good thing, particularly the deferred locking code. Fine with me. I'd be happy to remove all the deferred locking code from dlm; it never really worked. GFS2 uses deferred locks, at the very least in its direct_io path (gfs2_direct_IO in aops.c). So AFAIK we can't remove THAT without a certain amount of pain. Steve is on vacation / holiday this week, but he will be back on Thursday and Friday (which is a holiday). This is about deferred file locks from NFS, not gfs2's deferred lock mode. Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
