[PATCH]: Windows BRL Try 2

[Volker Lendecke]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 03:41:20PM -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:33:35PM -0800, Zack Kirsch wrote:
> > 
> > The issue here is that the decision to do an async lock is done after
> > trying a 
> > synchronous lock. As the code currently lies, doing an async lock
> > depends on the
> > return status of the sync lock call.
> > 
> > I think it would be a cleaner abstraction if we know whether we're okay 
> > doing an async lock from the beginning (i.e. when the sync-lock call is
> > made.)
> > Only paths that absolutely want no async locking would call into 
> > BRL_LOCK_WINDOWS_SYNC(), whereas paths that are okay with an async setup
> > would
> > call into BRL_LOCK_WINDOWS_ASYNC(). LockingX would then call one or the
> > other,
> > not both.
> 
> Ah ok. CC:ing samba-tech. What we should really do
> is just have one do_lock call that handles both
> sync and async case depending on the timeout parameter,
> and push all that logic down under the VFS layer into
> the default module.

Can I see the whole discussion please?

Thanks,

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20090219/c816abd9/attachment.bin