Hi,
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 12:49 PM Alexander Aring wrote:
>
> This patch implements dlm plock F_SETLKW interruption feature. If the
> pending plock operation is not sent to user space yet it can simple be
> dropped out of the send_list. In case it's already being sent we need to
> try to
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 9:54 AM Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 4:40 PM Alexander Aring wrote:
> > This patch introduces a new flag DLM_PLOCK_FL_NO_REPLY in case an dlm
> > plock operation should not send a reply back. Currently this is kind of
> > being handled in
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 4:40 PM Alexander Aring wrote:
> This patch introduces a new flag DLM_PLOCK_FL_NO_REPLY in case an dlm
> plock operation should not send a reply back. Currently this is kind of
> being handled in DLM_PLOCK_FL_CLOSE, but DLM_PLOCK_FL_CLOSE has more
> meanings that it will
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 1:08 PM Alexander Aring wrote:
>
> This patch implements DLM_PLOCK_OP_CANCEL to try to delete waiters for a
> lock request which are waiting to being granted. If the waiter can be
> deleted the reply to the kernel will be replaced from
> DLM_PLOCK_OP_LOCK to the sent
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 5:38 PM Cyril Hrubis wrote:
>
> Hi!
> > I can't reproduce this on current mainline. Is this a robust failure
> > or flapping test? Especiall as the FAIL conditions look rather
> > unrelated.
It's consistently reproducible for me on xfs with HEAD at:
eb26cbb1a754 ("Merge
Hi!
> > > I can't reproduce this on current mainline. Is this a robust failure
> > > or flapping test? Especiall as the FAIL conditions look rather
> > > unrelated.
>
> It's consistently reproducible for me on xfs with HEAD at:
> eb26cbb1a754 ("Merge tag 'platform-drivers-x86-v6.5-2' of
>
