r21724: Optimization pointed out by Volker. If we don't

have any outstanding locks or blocking locks then
we don't need to read the lock db. on close.
Jeremy.
(This used to be commit 1b063496f93f78347a6e67549bde54c845499a7d)

1 files changed, 20 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/source3/locking/locking.c b/source3/locking/locking.c
index 6c4e896a2a..304932cf32 100644
--- a/source3/locking/locking.c
+++ b/source3/locking/locking.c
@@ -222,6 +222,12 @@ struct byte_range_lock *do_lock(files_struct *fsp,
 			lock_flav,
 			blocking_lock);
 
+	/* blocking ie. pending, locks also count here,
+	 * as this is an efficiency counter to avoid checking
+	 * the lock db. on close. JRA. */
+
+	fsp->current_lock_count++;
+
 	return br_lck;
 }
 
@@ -268,6 +274,9 @@ NTSTATUS do_unlock(files_struct *fsp,
 		return NT_STATUS_RANGE_NOT_LOCKED;
 	}
 
+	SMB_ASSERT(fsp->current_lock_count > 0);
+	fsp->current_lock_count--;
+
 	return NT_STATUS_OK;
 }
 
@@ -315,6 +324,9 @@ NTSTATUS do_lock_cancel(files_struct *fsp,
 		return NT_STATUS_DOS(ERRDOS, ERRcancelviolation);
 	}
 
+	SMB_ASSERT(fsp->current_lock_count > 0);
+	fsp->current_lock_count++;
+
 	return NT_STATUS_OK;
 }
 
@@ -330,6 +342,14 @@ void locking_close_file(files_struct *fsp)
 		return;
 	}
 
+	/* If we have not outstanding locks or pending
+	 * locks then we don't need to look in the lock db.
+	 */
+
+	if (fsp->current_lock_count == 0) {
+		return;
+	}
+
 	br_lck = brl_get_locks(NULL,fsp);
 
 	if (br_lck) {