On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 08:30:41AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I think the i_version changes that hit mainline about a week ago are
not as nice as they should be.
First there's a complete lack of documentation on this, which is very
bad. Please document what the new semantics for
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 03:54:14PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
Interesting. It's not clear me why the underlying filesystem would make
any difference there. Though now that I look, it looks like fl_grant
really only gets called from dlm code, and that queues up the block for
an immediate grant
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:15:02AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 18:26:18 -0500
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 09:58:59AM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
On Jan 18, 2008, at 6:07 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 09:58:59AM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
On Jan 18, 2008, at 6:07 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 02:41:57PM -0800, Marc Eshel wrote:
The problem seems to be with the fact that the client and server are
on
the same machine. This test work fine
The following changes are available from the locks branch of the git
repository at:
git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux.git locks
These are just three small file-locking-related patches, mostly cleanup.
All of them have been unchanged in -mm for a while.
--b.
J. Bruce Fields (1):
locks
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 10:35:50AM -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
Hi.
Here is a patch set which modifies the system to enhance the
ESTALE error handling for system calls which take pathnames
as arguments.
I think your cover letter may be bigger than any of the actual
patches I'm not
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 11:45:52AM -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 10:36:01AM -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
static int path_lookup_create(int dfd, const char *name,
- unsigned int lookup_flags, struct nameidata *nd,
-
you said the server is trying to send the grant message to
the client but for some reason it fails when the client is on the same
machine.
That *shouldn't* make a difference, so we need to take another look at
this--Oleg, this problem is still unfixed, right?
--b.
Marc.
J. Bruce Fields
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
Chuck Lever wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008, at 12:30 PM, Peter Staubach wrote:
I can probably imagine a situation where the pathname resolution
would never finish, but I am not sure that it could ever happen
in nature.
Unless someone
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 09:26:06PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:44:19PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
Thanks! I've queued it up for 2.6.25.
Hi Bruce,
I haven't had as much time to play with de-BKL-ising fs/locks.c as I
would like, so fixing that for 2.6.25
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 09:28:30PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
interruptible_sleep_on_locked() is just an open-coded
wait_event_interruptible_timeout() with a few assumptions since we know
we hold the BKL. locks_block_on_timeout() is only used in one place, so
it's actually simpler to
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 09:29:39PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Reduce the spaghetti-like nature of flock_lock_file by making the chunk
of code labelled find_conflict into its own function. Also allocate
memory before taking the kernel lock in preparation for switching to a
normal spinlock.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:04:47AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:48:51AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 09:28:30PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
interruptible_sleep_on_locked() is just an open-coded
wait_event_interruptible_timeout
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:57:35PM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
On Nov 29, 2007, at 2:08 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 01:46:04PM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
Per our discussion, I am resending this patch that fixes a leak in
nlmsvc_testlock
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 01:55:36PM -0500, david m. richter wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Hi Bruce,
The current implementation of vfs_setlease/generic_setlease/etc is a
bit quirky. I've been thinking it over for the past couple of days,
and I think we need to
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 01:35:50PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
vfs_setlease()
if (f_op-setlease())
res = f_op-setlease()
if (res)
return res;
lock_kernel()
generic_setlease()
unlock_kernel()
Why can't the filesystem call into
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:08:18PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 03:53:04PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
So, the problem is that fcntl_setlease() does
vfs_setlease()
fasync_helper()
which the bkl held over both, and you want to preserve
On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 11:16:15PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I've been promising to do this for about seven years now.
It seems to work well enough, but I haven't run any serious stress
tests on it. This implementation uses one spinlock to protect both lock
lists and all the i_flock
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 03:57:29PM +0300, Vitaliy Gusev wrote:
I am working on pid namespaces vs locks interaction and want to evaluate the
idea.
fcntl(F_GETLK,..) can return pid of process for not current pid namespace (if
process is belonged to the several namespaces). It is true also for
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 01:46:04PM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
Per our discussion, I am resending this patch that fixes a leak in
nlmsvc_testlock. It is addition to another leak fixing patch you
already have. Without the patch, there is a leakage of nlmblock
structure
On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 02:04:40PM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
There is a problem with blocking async posix lock enqueue in
2.6.22 and 2.6.23 kernels. Lock call to underlying FS is done
just fine, but when fl_grant is called to inform lockd of
succesful granting,
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:59:46PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
BTW: Where did this discussion started? Googling the subject gives me just
one news message...
Here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevelm=119499881822672w=2
and before that, here:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 02:22:51PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
On 11/14/07, J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 04:30:16PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 11/14/07, Chuck Lever [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007, at 7
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 04:30:16PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 11/14/07, Chuck Lever [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007, at 7:04 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
Is it feasible to do something like this in the linux file system
architecture?
Beagle
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's currently possible to send posix_locks_deadlock() into an infinite
loop (under the BKL).
For now, fix this just by bailing out after a few iterations. We may
want to fix this in a way that better clarifies the semantics of
deadlock detection
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:06:04AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:43:21 -0400
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We currently attempt to return -EDEALK to blocking fcntl() file locking
requests that would create a cycle
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think the real solution is to remove deadlock detection completely;
it's hard to imaagine applications really depend on it anyway.
For now, though, just bail out after a few iterations.
Thanks to George Davis for reporting the problem.
Cc: George G
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We currently attempt to return -EDEALK to blocking fcntl() file locking
requests that would create a cycle in the graph of tasks waiting on
locks.
This is inefficient: in the general case it requires us determining
whether we're adding a cycle
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 06:40:52PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:27:32 -0600
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 01:43:21PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
We currently attempt to return -EDEALK to blocking fcntl() file locking
requests
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 04:41:57PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 05:50:30PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
You can't fix the false EDEADLK detection without solving the halting
problem. Best of luck with that.
I can see that it would be difficult to do
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 11:38:26PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
The spec and SYSV certainly ignore threading in this situation and you
know that perfectly well (or did in 2004)
The discussion petered out (or that mailing list archive lost articles
from the thread) without any kind of
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 06:03:01PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
And here's a patch to fix the typos Greg found:
Thanks. I already had a couple of those in a separate patch, so I've
folded this in.
--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in
the body of a
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 01:47:46PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patchset is a medium scale rewrite of the export operations
interface. The goal is to make the interface less complex, and
easier to understand from the filesystem side, aswell as preparing
generic support for exporting
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 07:00:25PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:43:55PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
I'm hoping Neil can take a quick look as well (and make a response to
the comment on patch #1 along the way).
The exportfs_d_alloc one? I have a patch
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 06:58:54PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
Subject : [NFSv4] 2.6.23-rc4 oops in nfs4_cb_recall
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/4/53
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9003
Last known good : ?
Submitter : Daniel J
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 05:14:53PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 03:07:46PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
I've been waiting for years for a smart person to come along and write a
POSIX-only distributed filesystem.
What exactly do you mean by POSIX-only
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 03:07:46PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
My thoughts. But first a disclaimer: Perhaps you will recall me as one
of the people who really reads all your patches, and examines your code and
proposals closely. So, with that in mind...
I question the value of distributed
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 06:32:11PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 05:14:53PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 03:07:46PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
I've been waiting for years for a smart person to come along
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 12:08:42AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
No, servers are required to support ordinary nfs operations to the
metadata server.
At least, that's the way it was last I heard, which was a while ago. I
agree that it'd stink (for any number of reasons
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:59:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Yes, please add them to the queue. I've put a quilt series of patches
with the whitespace fixe on http://verein.lst.de/~hch/patches.nfsd.tgz.
Do you want to take it that way or should I resend everything to the
list?
Yeah, I
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 03:16:32PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Trivial switch over to the new generic helpers.
- result = ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
- goto out_iput;
+ iput(inode);
+ return ERR_PTR(-ESTALE);
For some reason you're introducing a
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:28:23AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Make it a little more clear that this is the default implemenation for
the setleast operation.
Yeah, I guess that is more consistent with the rest of the vfs.
Thanks.--b.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Would it still be possible to merge this for 2.6.23? They've been
through linux-fsdevel, Christoph has taken a pass through them, and I
don't know of any unaddressed problems.
--b.
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:34:57PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
Please pull from the 'for-linus' branch
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 05:40:46PM -0500, Steve French wrote:
I have seen various requests from users to disable part of the CIFS
Unix Extensions on mount (in some cases fall back to the more
primitive Windows behavior) but am wondering how far down this line of
thought I should go ...
Why do
() and get_write_access() calls prevents this race.
Signed-off-by: David M. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/open.c | 16 +---
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
I posted this patch to linux-fsdevel last week and nobody said
to give out
delegations on cluster filesystems. For now, though, we're using this
just to disallow leases selectively on certain filesystems (nfs and gfs2
for now) where they don't make sense.
Also includes some minor locks.c cleanup.
J. Bruce Fields (9):
locks: convert an -EINVAL return
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 01:21:55PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
And just by-the-way, the server doesn't really have the option of not
sending the attribute. If i_version isn't defined, it has to fake
something using mtime, and hope that is good enough.
ctime, actually--the change attribute is
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 09:28:06AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 15:05 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
It just occurred to me:
If i_version is 64bit, then knfsd would need to be careful when
reading it on a 32bit host. What are the locking rules?
How does knfsd use
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:20:18AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:41:00AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
OK, after looking at this a little more, I'm less happy about the idea
of erroring out by default:
- There are a ton of filesystems that probably should
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 05:32:00PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Jul 03, 2007 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
How will nfsd tell whether it can really on a given filesystem's
i_version, or whether it should fall back on ctime?
Good question.
Well, we don't need anything
() and get_write_access() calls prevents this race.
Signed-off-by: David M. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/open.c | 16 +---
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
index 0d515d1..c32aba0 100644
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:25:16AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:30PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
Define an nfs setlease method that just returns -EOPNOTSUPP.
If someone can demonstrate a real need, perhaps we could reenable
them in the presence
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:22:43AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:27PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We've been using the convention that vfs_foo is the function that calls
a filesystem-specific foo method
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:23:45AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:28PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bring lease exports into line with conventions for posix locks:
setlease() should be exported so filesystems can
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:27:42AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:29PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
+static int gfs2_setlease(struct file *file, long arg, struct file_lock
**fl)
+{
+ struct gfs2_sbd *sdp = GFS2_SB(file-f_mapping-host);
+ int ret
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:25:16AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:30PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As Peter Staubach says elsewhere
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=118113649526444w=2):
The problem
On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 03:37:16AM -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
This patch adds a 32-bit i_version_hi field to ext4_inode, which can be used
for 64-bit inode versions. This field will store the higher 32 bits of the
version, while Jean Noel's patch has added support to store the lower 32-bits
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 10:58:33AM -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
Trond or Bruce, can you please review these patch series and ack if you
agrees?
Thanks, looks like what we need!
How will nfsd tell whether it can really on a given filesystem's
i_version, or whether it should fall back on ctime?
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:20:13AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:25PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Share more code between setlease (used by nfsd) and fcntl.
Also some minor cleanup.
Looks good. Fine
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:27:42AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 03:21:29PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
+static int gfs2_setlease(struct file *file, long arg, struct file_lock
**fl)
+{
+ struct gfs2_sbd *sdp = GFS2_SB(file-f_mapping-host);
+ int ret
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bring lease exports into line with conventions for posix locks:
setlease() should be exported so filesystems can use it to implement
their lease methods.
vfs_setlease() need only be GPL-exported since only nfsd
Eventually we want to be able to support NFSv4 delegations for cluster
filesystem exports. We implement NFSv4 delegations using leases. So to
make this work, we need leases to be passed down to the filesystem, so
that a cluster filesystem can enforce leases correctly across all nodes.
The
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We've been using the convention that vfs_foo is the function that calls
a filesystem-specific foo method if it exists, or falls back on a
generic method if it doesn't.
So rename setlease to vfs_setlease, and __setlease to setlease. Keep
setlease exported
case all
locking is local anyway).
Signed-off-by: Marc Eshel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Steven Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/gfs2/ops_file.c | 26 ++
1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/gfs2
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As Peter Staubach says elsewhere
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=118113649526444w=2):
The problem is that some file system such as NFSv2 and NFSv3 do
not have sufficient support to be able to support leases correctly.
In particular for these two file
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Currently leases are only kept locally, so there's no way for a distributed
filesystem to enforce them against multiple clients. We're particularly
interested in the case of nfsd exporting a cluster filesystem, in which
case nfsd needs cluster-coherent
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 05:16:19PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote:
First, there is already some support to disable leases for NFS mounted
file systems in -mm, I think.
Oops, sorry; my fault for not checking -mm before sending
Are you planning on removing it?
I'd rather do that, yes. Any
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 11:30:27PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
EINVAL is fine by me, just so long as its not EAGAIN then it gets my
blessing :-)
OK. I've changed the error return, in both the NFS and GFS2 cases, did
some minor cleanup and commenting while I was at it, and pushed the
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:30:33PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
Well, I just want to make sure people know that Samba isn't asking for
it any more, and I don't know of any current requests outstanding from
any of the userspace projects. So there's no one we need to ship off
to the re-education
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 09:56:29AM -0700, Marc Eshel wrote:
We need to export vfs_lease so nfsd can call it.
Oops, thanks for finding that--done.--b.
--b.
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 82ac90b..c2fd0a5 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -1453,6 +1453,8 @@ int
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 10:38:18AM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 09:35 -0700, Marc Eshel wrote:
This is the return code that setlease() currently returns when the lease
can not be obtained. Although ENOTSUPP would be more accurately describing
the error it
From: Marc Eshel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since gfs2 can't prevent conflicting opens or leases on other nodes, we
probably shouldn't allow it to give out leases at all.
Put the newly defined lease operation into use in gfs2 by turning off
lease, unless we're using the nolock' locking module (in which
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, good. I'll revise and post a new series. (Do people prefer
another mailbomb or a git url?)
OK, I went for the former; if you'd rather get this out of git, you can
git clone http://www.linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux.git
git checkout
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We've been using the convention that vfs_foo is the function that calls
a filesystem-specific foo method if it exists, or falls back on a
generic method if it doesn't.
So rename setlease to vfs_setlease, and __setlease to setlease. Keep
setlease exported
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Share more code between setlease (used by nfsd) and fcntl.
Also some minor cleanup.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/locks.c | 30 ++
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As Peter Staubach says elsewhere
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=118113649526444w=2):
The problem is that some file system such as NFSv2 and NFSv3 do
not have sufficient support to be able to support leases correctly.
In particular for these two file
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Currently leases are only kept locally, so there's no way for a distributed
filesystem to enforce them against multiple clients. We're particularly
interested in the case of nfsd exporting a cluster filesystem, in which
case nfsd needs cluster-coherent
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:43:51AM -0400, Robert Rappaport wrote:
My interpretation of the preceeding is that there is agreement that
the functionality currently implemented in __setlease() should be
exported, even though the exported name may not be __setlease(). Is
this correct?
Yes.
If
On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 02:21:22PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
Currently, the lease handling is done all in the VFS, and is done prior
to calling any filesystem operations. Bruce's break_lease() inode
operation allows the VFS to notify the filesystem that some operation is
going to be called
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 09:14:53AM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Currently leases are only kept locally, so there's no way for a distributed
filesystem to enforce them against multiple clients. We're particularly
interested
On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 06:34:09PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:40 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
index 7cf0c54..09aefb4 100644
--- a/include/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
@@ -1112,6 +1112,7 @@ struct
becomes a simple BKL-taking wrapper around
__setlease(); is that what you were thinking of?
--b.
From 4ce02551ab16d2812299ac0ced43652f1af0deb1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 17:03:46 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] locks: share more common lease code
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 11:41:23AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Samba internally prohibits renaming or deleting an open file, to match
Windows semantics. So it won't notice the difference. At least, that's
what I remember from a discussion with Tridge when we were implementing
leases back in
From: Marc Eshel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since gfs2 can't prevent conflicting opens or leases on other nodes, we
probably shouldn't allow it to give out leases at all.
Put the newly defined lease operation into use in gfs2 by turning off
lease, unless we're using the nolock' locking module (in which
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Share more code between setlease (used by nfsd) and fcntl.
Also some minor cleanup.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/locks.c | 14 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Currently leases are only kept locally, so there's no way for a distributed
filesystem to enforce them against multiple clients. We're particularly
interested in the case of nfsd exporting a cluster filesystem, in which
case nfsd needs cluster-coherent
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 09:35:32AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--without having tried to understand how they're actually used, these
data structures (like the pending_locks and granted_locks lists) seem to
duplicate stuff that's already kept in fs
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 10:34:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
I'll need to test the upgrade/downgrade case. I don't know whether the AFS
server supports that. If it doesn't, I can emulate downgrade, but not upgrade
- not unless I only ever ask it for exclusive locks.
Lock upgrading is
One more vague question I had while skimming the previous version--
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 03:54:27PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
+static void afs_grant_locks(struct afs_vnode *vnode, struct file_lock *fl)
+{
+ struct file_lock *p, *_p;
+
+ list_move_tail(fl-fl_u.afs.link,
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 09:51:10AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if I request a write lock while holding a read lock, my request will
be denied?
At the moment, yes. Don't the POSIX and flock lock-handling routines in the
kernel normally do
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 05:55:54PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
+/*
+ * initialise the lock manager thread if it isn't already running
+ */
+static int afs_init_lock_manager(void)
+{
+ if (!afs_lock_manager) {
+ afs_lock_manager = create_singlethread_workqueue(kafs_lockd);
+
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:55:41AM -0500, Steven French wrote:
Any ideas what are the minimum export operation(s) that cifs would need to
add to export under nfsd? It was not clear to me after reading the
Exporting document in Documentation directory.
(some users had wanted to export
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:03:57PM -0500, Steven French wrote:
I thought that until a few days ago, a sequence like the following (two
nfs servers exporting the same clustered data)
on client 1 lock range A through B of file1 (exported from nfs server 1)
on client 2 lock range A through C
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Acked-by: Steven Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
commit 1a8322b2b02071b0c7ac37a28357b93e6362f13e
Author: Marc Eshel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Nov 28 16:27:06 2006 -0500
lockd: add code to handle deferred lock requests
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:05:19AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:55:33 -0400 J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've got an updated series addressing Christoph's comments (except that
it's still using FL_CANCEL instead of a -cancel() file method). I
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 08:10:37PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
Add security support to the AFS filesystem. Kerberos IV tickets are
added as RxRPC keys are added to the session keyring with the klog
program. open() and other VFS operations then find this ticket with
request_key() and either
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:40:41PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 07:40:58PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
We're using fl_notify to asynchronously return the result of a lock
request. So we want fl_notify to be able to return a status and, if
appropriate
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:41:44PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 07:40:59PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
We do this by adding a new fcntl lock command: FL_CANCELLK. Some day this
might also be made available to userspace applications that could benefit
from
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:43:52PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 07:41:02PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
+ if (block-b_fl)
+ kfree(block-b_fl);
kfree(NULL) is fine.
Whoops, thanks, will fix.
+static void
+nlmsvc_update_deferred_block(struct
On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 08:30:04PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 19:40:51 -0400 J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] - unquoted
Remove some unnecessary parentheses.
Please don't do this. It is unnecessary churn
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
