[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231211191117.GD1674809@ZenIV>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 19:11:17 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] nfsd: use __fput_sync() to avoid delayed closing of
files.
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 09:47:35AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> Similarly would could wrap __fput_sync() is a more friendly name, but
> that would be better if we actually renamed the function.
>
> void fput_now(struct file *f)
> {
> __fput_sync(f);
> }
It is unfriendly *precisely* because it should not be used without
a very good reason.
It may be the last opened file keeping a lazy-umounted mount alive.
It may be taking pretty much any locks, or eating a lot of stack
space.
It really isn't a general-purpose API; any "more friendly name"
is going to be NAKed for that reason alone.
Al, very much tempted to send a patch renaming that sucker to
__fput_dont_use_that_unless_you_really_know_what_you_are_doing().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists