OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks
[PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks [message #20352] Mon, 17 September 2007 07:57 Go to next message
Pavel Emelianov is currently offline  Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
The __mandatory_lock(inode) macro makes the same check, but
makes the code more readable.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>

---

 fs/nfs/file.c |    3 +--
 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
index 73ddd2e..7a07be1 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
@@ -605,8 +605,7 @@ static int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, i
 	nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
 
 	/* No mandatory locks over NFS */
-	if ((inode->i_mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == S_ISGID &&
-	    fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
+	if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
 		return -ENOLCK;
 
 	if (IS_GETLK(cmd))
Re: [PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks [message #20391 is a reply to message #20352] Mon, 17 September 2007 17:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Trond Myklebust is currently offline  Trond Myklebust
Messages: 24
Registered: July 2006
Junior Member
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 11:57 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> The __mandatory_lock(inode) macro makes the same check, but
> makes the code more readable.

Could we please avoid using underscores in macros. Also, why are we
breaking the usual convention of capitalising macro names?

Cheers
  Trond

> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
> Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
> 
> ---
> 
>  fs/nfs/file.c |    3 +--
>  1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
> index 73ddd2e..7a07be1 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
> @@ -605,8 +605,7 @@ static int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, i
>  	nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
>  
>  	/* No mandatory locks over NFS */
> -	if ((inode->i_mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == S_ISGID &&
> -	    fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
> +	if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
>  		return -ENOLCK;
>  
>  	if (IS_GETLK(cmd))
>
Re: [PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks [message #20444 is a reply to message #20391] Tue, 18 September 2007 06:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Pavel Emelianov is currently offline  Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 11:57 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> The __mandatory_lock(inode) macro makes the same check, but
>> makes the code more readable.
> 
> Could we please avoid using underscores in macros. Also, why are we
> breaking the usual convention of capitalising macro names?

Sorry, I've forgot to change all the log - this is not a macro, 
but a static inline function. The underscores are here, because 
the mandatory_lock() one already exists and additionally checks 
for "if (IS_MANDLOCK(inode))"

Thanks,
Pavel

> Cheers
>   Trond
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
>> Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
>>
>> ---
>>
>>  fs/nfs/file.c |    3 +--
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
>> index 73ddd2e..7a07be1 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
>> @@ -605,8 +605,7 @@ static int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, i
>>  	nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
>>  
>>  	/* No mandatory locks over NFS */
>> -	if ((inode->i_mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == S_ISGID &&
>> -	    fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
>> +	if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
>>  		return -ENOLCK;
>>  
>>  	if (IS_GETLK(cmd))
>>
> 
>
Re: [PATCH 5/5][NFS] Cleanup explicit check for mandatory locks [message #20470 is a reply to message #20444] Tue, 18 September 2007 13:27 Go to previous message
Trond Myklebust is currently offline  Trond Myklebust
Messages: 24
Registered: July 2006
Junior Member
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:20 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 11:57 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> >> The __mandatory_lock(inode) macro makes the same check, but
> >> makes the code more readable.
> > 
> > Could we please avoid using underscores in macros. Also, why are we
> > breaking the usual convention of capitalising macro names?
> 
> Sorry, I've forgot to change all the log - this is not a macro, 
> but a static inline function. The underscores are here, because 
> the mandatory_lock() one already exists and additionally checks 
> for "if (IS_MANDLOCK(inode))"

OK. I withdraw my objection then.

Cheers
  Trond
Previous Topic: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure
Next Topic: [PATCH 20/33] memory controller add documentation
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Jun 25 05:33:43 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03623 seconds