On Mo, 2017-01-16 at 13:53 -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote: > Swen, I've been looking at your patch, and it has some good ideas. > For some odd reason, I awoke at 1:30 am thinking about it, and > got up and wrote some code. > I never intended to give you sleepless nights :-)
> I've taken another patch of mine, and added the SVCXPRT into the > rpc_dplx_rec, eliminating the refcnt entirely (using the SVCXPRT). > > After all, there's no reason to zalloc them separately. They > always are created at the same time. > > So I'm wondering about your thoughts on the locking. They seem > redundant. I'm thinking about changing REC_LOCK to use the > SVCXPRT xp_lock, instead. > > There's a spot in the existing rpc_dplx_rec creation code where > there's a timing hole in the code after an existing one is > found so the extra refcount is decremented. Another process > could also decrement and free, and there could be a pointer into > freed memory. Unifying the lock would be one solution (better > and faster than the usual solution with two locks). > > The SVCXPRT lock code has a lot more debugging and testing, too. > > Any other related ideas? > > BTW, I got rid of the &oflags, too. Changed it to a callback > function.... ;) That sounds like a much more invasive change. I wasn't that brave at the time and just tried to fix what was wrong, anyhow, a good rewrite of that area is always favorable. It would be good if you could post/include all your patches as soon as possible as I believe the ntirpc area does need some updates. I hope I will find some time again soon and try to help out as well, if that's ok. Cheers Swen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Nfs-ganesha-devel mailing list Nfs-ganesha-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs-ganesha-devel
