Re: [PATCH 3/5] NLM: Have lockd call try_to_freeze

[Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:01:34 -0500
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> wrote:

> lockd makes itself freezable, but never calls try_to_freeze(). Have it
> call try_to_freeze() within the main loop.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> ---
>  fs/lockd/svc.c |    3 +++
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/lockd/svc.c b/fs/lockd/svc.c
> index 82e2192..6ee8bed 100644
> --- a/fs/lockd/svc.c
> +++ b/fs/lockd/svc.c
> @@ -155,6 +155,9 @@ lockd(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>  		long timeout = MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT;
>  		char buf[RPC_MAX_ADDRBUFLEN];
>  
> +		if (try_to_freeze())
> +			continue;
> +
>  		if (signalled()) {
>  			flush_signals(current);
>  			if (nlmsvc_ops) {


I was looking over svc_recv today and noticed that it calls
try_to_freeze a couple of times. Given that, the above patch may be
unnecessary. I don't think it hurts anything though. Should we keep
this patch or drop it?

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>