Hi,

Thanks a lot for your quick response and comment.

We hope to make corrections better and incorporate them into mainline by 
proceeding
with the review. 

The primary test which we've been using for those reported cases is to mount
and umount from multiple nodes at the same time.
i.e.;
mkfs.ocfs2 --cluster-stack=pcmk --cluster-name=debian -N <N> /dev/blkdevice

while true; do
  dsh -c -m node1,node2,node3...node<N> 'mount /dev/blkdevice fmxa /mnt';
  dsh -c -mnode1,node2,node3...node<N> 'umount /mnt';
done
  where: <N> = 12, 24, or 48

Please let us know if Do you have any other test casss in mind?

thanks.
-- owa
ps. Please give us a week to reply as we're going to have public holidays in 
Japan.


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Whitehouse [mailto:swhit...@redhat.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:36 PM
To: owa tsutomu(大輪 勤 TMC ○SSDジ□ES技○ES五); cluster-devel@redhat.com
Cc: miyauchi tadashi(宮内 忠志 TOPS (SW開)[基本])
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 00/17] DLM: dlm patches need review

Hi,


On 09/08/17 06:36, tsutomu....@toshiba.co.jp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This series of patches is to fix various bugs.  This patch set is against the 
> mainline kernel.
> I'd like reviewed to make sure those changes are fine.
>
> Patch number 01/02/03 were posted on this mailing list by Bob Peterson 
> <rpete...@redhat.com>.
> Patch 03 is modified to correct a bug acquiring rwlock multiple times.
> Other than that, there is no changes.
>
> 01:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2017-April/msg00021.html
> 02:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2017-April/msg00022.html
> 03:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2017-April/msg00023.html
>
> thanks in advance.
> -- owa
> ps. Sorry to bother you if you got those mails several times.
>
>

Many thanks for looking so closely at the DLM and in sending this patch  
set. Some of the patches I can see are obvious fixes and others I'd need  
a bit more time to look at to be sure about. I've sent a few individual  
comments for some of the patches. However overall this looks like a  
really good set of patches, and I'm sure took some time for you to put  
together. I think the best thing would be for us to get these patches  
into a kernel now and run some tests, since there is quite a lot of change,

Steve.





Reply via email to