On Donnerstag, 21. Januar 2021 17:34:55 CET Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * v9fs_reopen_fid() can yield : a reference on the fid must be
> > > held
> > > + * to ensure its pointer remains valid and we can safely pass it to
> > > + * QSIMPLEQ_NEXT(). The corresponding pu
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:50:37 +0100
Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> On Montag, 18. Januar 2021 15:23:00 CET Greg Kurz wrote:
> > If a fid was actually re-open by v9fs_reopen_fid(), we re-traverse the
>
> "re-opened"
>
> > fid list from the head in case some other request created a fid that
> > ne
On Montag, 18. Januar 2021 15:23:00 CET Greg Kurz wrote:
> If a fid was actually re-open by v9fs_reopen_fid(), we re-traverse the
"re-opened"
> fid list from the head in case some other request created a fid that
> needs to be marked unreclaimable as well (ie. the client open a new
"i.e." and ei
If a fid was actually re-open by v9fs_reopen_fid(), we re-traverse the
fid list from the head in case some other request created a fid that
needs to be marked unreclaimable as well (ie. the client open a new
handle on the path that is being unlinked). This is a suboptimal since
most if not all fids
