One more vague question I had while skimming the previous version--
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 03:54:27PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> +static void afs_grant_locks(struct afs_vnode *vnode, struct file_lock *fl)
> +{
> + struct file_lock *p, *_p;
> +
> + list_move_tail(&fl->fl_u.afs.link, &vnode->granted_locks);
> + if (fl->fl_type == F_RDLCK) {
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(p, _p, &vnode->pending_locks,
> + fl_u.afs.link) {
> + if (p->fl_type == F_RDLCK) {
> + p->fl_u.afs.state = AFS_LOCK_GRANTED;
> + list_move_tail(&p->fl_u.afs.link,
> + &vnode->granted_locks);
> + wake_up(&p->fl_wait);
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +}
--without having tried to understand how they're actually used, these
data structures (like the pending_locks and granted_locks lists) seem to
duplicate stuff that's already kept in fs/locks.c. Is there a reason
they're required?
--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
