From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758271AbaGAQrZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:47:25 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15958 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756563AbaGAQrX (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 12:47:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:46:52 -0500 From: David Teigland To: Jeff Layton Cc: Joe Perches , Christine Caulfield , Trond Myklebust , "J. Bruce Fields" , cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant Message-ID: <20140701164652.GB32565@redhat.com> References: <1404220810.2717.39.camel@joe-AO725> <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Teigland Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:46:52 -0500 Message-ID: <20140701164652.GB32565@redhat.com> References: <1404220810.2717.39.camel@joe-AO725> <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Joe Perches , Christine Caulfield , Trond Myklebust , "J. Bruce Fields" , cluster-devel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jeff Layton Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140701104313.5317400a-9yPaYZwiELC+kQycOl6kW4xkIHaj4LzF@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Teigland Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [RFC PATCH] dlm: Remove unused conf from lm_grant In-Reply-To: <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> References: <1404220810.2717.39.camel@joe-AO725> <20140701104313.5317400a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Message-ID: <20140701164652.GB32565@redhat.com> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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