From c31663d4a1fac5ce1954d656cbcf80eb883b814a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fred Isaman <iisaman@netapp.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 11:36:24 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] pnfs: layoutget rpc code cleanup
No functional changes, just some code minor code rearrangement and
comments.
Signed-off-by: Fred Isaman <iisaman@netapp.com>
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
---
fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
index 28e175e74de2..5bee453d36d6 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
@@ -5293,10 +5293,14 @@ static void
nfs4_layoutget_prepare(struct rpc_task *task, void *calldata)
{
struct nfs4_layoutget *lgp = calldata;
- struct inode *ino = lgp->args.inode;
- struct nfs_server *server = NFS_SERVER(ino);
+ struct nfs_server *server = NFS_SERVER(lgp->args.inode);
dprintk("--> %s\n", __func__);
+ /* Note the is a race here, where a CB_LAYOUTRECALL can come in
+ * right now covering the LAYOUTGET we are about to send.
+ * However, that is not so catastrophic, and there seems
+ * to be no way to prevent it completely.
+ */
if (nfs4_setup_sequence(server, &lgp->args.seq_args,
&lgp->res.seq_res, 0, task))
return;
@@ -5379,13 +5383,10 @@ int nfs4_proc_layoutget(struct nfs4_layoutget *lgp)
if (IS_ERR(task))
return PTR_ERR(task);
status = nfs4_wait_for_completion_rpc_task(task);
- if (status != 0)
- goto out;
- status = task->tk_status;
- if (status != 0)
- goto out;
- status = pnfs_layout_process(lgp);
-out:
+ if (status == 0)
+ status = task->tk_status;
+ if (status == 0)
+ status = pnfs_layout_process(lgp);
rpc_put_task(task);
dprintk("<-- %s status=%d\n", __func__, status);
return status;