[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] Is this intentional: specifying a new completion ast routine on a convert



Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:49:48 PM, Jeff wrote:

> This is from device.c. The intent seems to
> be that if an argument is specified, then it overrides
> an existing value. However, a new completion ast address
> is only loaded if a new blocking ast address is specified.

>         if (kparams->flags & DLM_LKF_CONVERT) {
>                 struct dlm_lkb *lkb =
> dlm_get_lkb(fi->fi_ls->ls_lockspace, kparams->lkid);
>                 if (!lkb) {
>                         return -EINVAL;
>                 }
>                 li = (struct lock_info *)lkb->lkb_astparam;

>                 /* Only override these if they are provided */
>                 if (li->li_user_lksb)
>                         li->li_user_lksb = kparams->lksb;
>                 if (li->li_astparam)
>                         li->li_astparam  = kparams->astparam;
>                 if (li->li_bastaddr)
>                         li->li_bastaddr  = kparams->bastaddr;
--->>            if (li->li_bastaddr)
--->>                    li->li_astaddr   = kparams->astaddr;
>                 li->li_flags     = 0;
>         }

Looking at this again, shouldn't it be testing kparams-> in
the if() rather than li->*? The current code seems to write new
values if there were old ones as opposed to if new values
are specified.




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]