On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 12:11:18 +1100
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2014 13:24:09 -0500 Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
wrote:
tl;dr: this code works and is much simpler than the dedicated thread
pool, but there are some latencies in the workqueue code
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:56:49 -0500
Tejun Heo t...@kernel.org wrote:
Hello, Neil, Jeff.
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 08:29:46PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
That's a good point. I had originally thought that max_active on an
unbound workqueue would be the number of concurrent jobs that could run
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:04:05 -0500
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:56:49 -0500
Tejun Heo t...@kernel.org wrote:
Hello, Neil, Jeff.
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 08:29:46PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
That's a good point. I had originally thought
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:08:01 -0500
Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:04:05 -0500
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:56:49 -0500
Tejun
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:59:43 -0500
Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:08:01 -0500
Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com wrote:
Which workqueue are you using
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 15:44:31 -0500
Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:59:43 -0500
Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:20
, but this is not a particularly hot codepath and
so I'm ok with this.
This should probably also go to stable.
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http
tuning to do here before this is quite
ready for prime-time. It may be worth testing in your environment
though if you have the time and ability to do so.
On 12/04/2014 03:47 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
I was using ftrace with the sunrpc:* and workqueue:* tracepoints, and
had a simple perl script
On Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:47:09 -0500
J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 01:24:18PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
diff --git a/net/sunrpc/Kconfig b/net/sunrpc/Kconfig
index fb78117b896c..08e01949bdc5 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/Kconfig
+++ b/net/sunrpc/Kconfig
or comments are welcome.
Jeff Layton (16):
sunrpc: add a new svc_serv_ops struct and move sv_shutdown into it
sunrpc: move sv_function into sv_ops
sunrpc: move sv_module parm into sv_ops
sunrpc: turn enqueueing a svc_xprt into a svc_serv operation
sunrpc: abstract out svc_set_num_threads
NUMA-aware, we can use a NUMA-aware
shrinker as well.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 11 ++--
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 11
net/sunrpc/svc.c | 1 +
net/sunrpc/svc_wq.c| 158
is in use.
Likewise, export svc_pool_map_get/put function to make it safe to do so.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 25 +
net/sunrpc/svc.c | 31 +++
2 files changed, 32 insertions
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/trace/events/sunrpc.h | 46 +++
net/sunrpc/svcsock.c | 6 ++
2 files changed, 52 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h b/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
index
Turn the svc_xprt_dequeue and svc_xprt_do_enqueue tracepoints into a
event classes, and use them to add events for svc_xprt_enqueued,
svc_xprt_active, svc_xprt_received, and svc_xprt_enqueue.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/trace/events/sunrpc.h | 36
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/trace/events/sunrpc.h | 6 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h b/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
index 41e09a1b962d..0d54473d9b37 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
and then switch to using that in the nfsd function. Once we add
workqueue support, we'll have the work function switch to the new fs
struct when doing the work and then switch it back.
Cc: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/fs_struct.c | 59
Allow nfsd to create a workqueue based nfsd service if the sunrpc
pool_mode is set to workqueue.
The first iteration here is fairly simple. The xprt work simply
allocates a svc_rqst object, and then queues that work.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/fs_struct.c
We want to queue most of the work in the context of the svc_rqst. Add a
work_struct to the svc_rqst and a new operation for svc_rqst_work. If
that's defined then initialize it when setting up the service.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 4
For workqueue-based services we'll want to queue a workqueue job
whenever a xprt needs to be serviced. Add a work_struct to svc_xprt
and initialize it from a new work_func_t field in the svc_serv_ops.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 3
Add an operation that will do setup of the service. In the case of a
classic thread-based service that means starting up threads. In the case
of a workqueue-based service, the setup will do something different.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 8
Since we now have a container for holding svc_serv operations, move the
sv_function into it as well.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 3 ++-
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 11 +++
net/sunrpc/svc.c | 8 +++-
3 files changed
For now, all services use svc_xprt_do_enqueue, but once we add
workqueue-based service support, we'll need to do something different.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/lockd/svc.c | 3 ++-
fs/nfs/callback.c | 1 +
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
In later patches, we'll want to be able to allocate and free svc_rqst
structures without monkeying with the serv-sv_nrthreads refcount.
Factor those pieces out of their respective functions.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 3 +++
net/sunrpc
In later patches we'll need to abstract out more operations on a
per-service level, besides sv_shutdown and sv_function.
Declare a new svc_serv_ops struct to hold these operations, and move
sv_shutdown into this struct.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/lockd/svc.c
...not technically an operation, but it's more convenient and cleaner
to pass the module pointer in this struct.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 3 ++-
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 9 ++---
net/sunrpc/svc.c | 8 +++-
3 files
of this is quite simple. When a svc_xprt needs to be
serviced we queue its work and return. In later patches, we'll optimize
this a bit more.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/sunrpc/svc.h | 8 ++-
include/linux/sunrpc/svc_xprt.h | 1 +
include/linux
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:31:55 -0800
Chuck Lever chuck.le...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Jeff-
On Dec 10, 2014, at 11:07 AM, Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com wrote:
This is the second revision of the workqueue-based nfsd. Changes from
the RFC version I posted earlier:
v2:
- found
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
This makes things a bit more efficient in the cifs and ceph lock
pushing code.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs/ceph/locks.c| 11 ++-
fs/cifs/file.c | 14 --
fs
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
The current scheme of using the i_flock list is really difficult to
manage. There is also a legitimate desire for a per-inode spinlock to
manage these lists that isn't the i_lock.
Start conversion to a new scheme to eventually replace the old i_flock
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 2 +-
include/linux/fs.h | 19 ++-
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 2fc36b3772a0..4d0d41163a50 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs/ceph/locks.c | 58 +---
fs/cifs/file.c | 26 +
fs/lockd/svcsubs.c | 20 ++
fs/locks.c
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
There is only a single call site for each of these functions, and the
caller takes the i_lock prior to calling them and drops it just
afterward. Move the spinlocking into the functions instead.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked
*fl)
{
if (cmd == F_GETLK)
return posix_test_lock(filp, fl);
return posix_lock_file(filp, fl, fl);
}
...untested of course, but you get the idea.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Jeff Layton
jeff.lay...@primarydata.com wrote:
v3:
- break out a ceph locking
...@redhat.com
Cc: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org
Cc: David Howells dhowe...@redhat.com
Cc: Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com
Cc: Oleg Nesterov onest...@redhat.com
Cc: Eric W. Biederman ebied...@xmission.com
Cc: Jeff Layton jeff.lay
On Sun, 08 Feb 2015 11:07:32 +0800
Ian Kent ik...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2015-02-06 at 07:08 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 10:34:11 +0800
Ian Kent ik...@redhat.com wrote:
The call_usermodehelper() function executes all binaries in the
global init root context
...@redhat.com
Cc: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org
Cc: David Howells dhowe...@redhat.com
Cc: Trond Myklebust trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com
Cc: Oleg Nesterov onest...@redhat.com
Cc: Eric W. Biederman ebied...@xmission.com
Cc: Jeff Layton jeff.lay
On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 10:40:25 +1300
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net wrote:
git://git.samba.org/jlayton/linux.git
52d304eb4eaced9ad04b64ba7cd6ceb5153bbf18
Ugh. What are you doing?
Don't send me
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:44:41 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/14/2015 09:27 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:50:45 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/13/2015 04:44 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:11:37 -0500
Sasha
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:10:46 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 09:40 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:31:23 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/15/2015 03:22 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
Ok, I tried to reproduce
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:53:04 -0500
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:10:46 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 09:40 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:31:23 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:31:23 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/15/2015 03:22 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
Ok, I tried to reproduce it with that and several variations but it
still doesn't seem to do it for me. Can you try the latest linux-next
tree and see if it's still
On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:44:41 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/14/2015 09:27 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:50:45 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/13/2015 04:44 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:11:37 -0500
Sasha
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:50:45 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/13/2015 04:44 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:11:37 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
Hey Jeff,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running the latest
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
...that we can use to queue file_locks to per-ctx list_heads. Go ahead
and convert locks_delete_lock and locks_dispose_list to use it instead
of the fl_block list.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Nothing uses it anymore. Also add a forward declaration for struct
file_lock to silence some compiler warnings that the removal triggers.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
include/linux/fs.h
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
...instead of open-coding it and removing flock locks directly. This
helps consolidate the flock lock removal logic into a single spot.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 49
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs/locks.c | 252 +
include/linux/fs.h | 5 +-
2 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 155 deletions
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
We can now add a dedicated spinlock without expanding struct inode.
Change to using that to protect the various i_flctx lists.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs/ceph/locks.c | 8
We have each of the locks_remove_* variants doing this individually.
Have the caller do it instead, and have locks_remove_flock and
locks_remove_lease just assume that it's a valid pointer.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 9 +++--
1 file changed, 7
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Now that we use standard list_heads for tracking leases, we can have
lm_change take a pointer to the lease to be modified instead of a
double pointer.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs
with
that for now.
For now, the code is still pretty raw and isn't bisectable. This is
just a RFC for the basic approach. This is probably v3.19 material at
best.
Anyone have thoughts or comments on the basic approach?
Jeff Layton (13):
locks: add new struct list_head to struct file_lock
locks
From: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de
---
fs/ceph/locks.c | 23 ---
fs/locks.c | 54 ++---
fs/nfs/delegation.c | 19
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:25:02 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/16/2015 04:16 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:53:04 -0500
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:10:46 -0500
Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com wrote
the
new lock.
When we add a new lock, set fl to that value so that we can
add left before it.
Reported-by: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index
.
Linus
Thanks for helping sanity check this stuff.
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:41:40 -0800
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net wrote:
What about this instead then?
No. Really.
- leave the drop the spinlock thing in place in flock_lock_file for
v3.20
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:10:17 -0500
J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 07:46:28AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
As Linus pointed out:
Say we have an existing flock, and now do a new one that conflicts. I
see what looks like three separate bugs
locks
associated with the same filp, but that's the way it has worked now for
years. I'm leery of changing that behavior in the context of this set.
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord
sections around a read lock
I'd say that file locking merge is most likely suspect...
Almost certainly. I'll take a look.
Thanks,
--
Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
Cc: J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org
Cc: John Kacur jka...@redhat.com
Cc: linux-fsde...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-rt-us...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Thanks for the patch. Some general comments first:
- fs
introduce some smaller patches to fix
up the bug you spotted, but at least we'll be proceeding from a spot
that is known to work.
I'll start preparing a pull request that does that...
Thanks,
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:21:30 -0800
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net wrote:
Now that I look, it may be best to just revert this whole set for now.
Linus, are you amenable to doing that?
Sure. But I'd
On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:32:00 +0200
Kirill A. Shutemov kir...@shutemov.name wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 05:55:40AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
The following changes since commit cb59670870d90ff8bc31f5f2efc407c6fe4938c0:
Merge branch 'for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux
.. and they passed.
Linus
I also ran the LTP suite on it last night and all of the fcntl and
flock tests that passed v3.19 also passed with this set (thanks Al for
pointing those out!)
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 17:21:02 -0500
J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 02:11:36PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:56:49PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:10:17 -0500
J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org wrote
of patches to fix problems with the recent file locking
changes that we discussed earlier this week.
Jeff Layton (4):
Revert locks: keep a count of locks on the flctx lists
locks: only remove leases associated with the file
This reverts commit 9bd0f45b7037fcfa8b575c7e27d0431d6e6dc3bb.
Linus rightly pointed out that I failed to initialize the counters
when adding them, so they don't work as expected. Just revert this
patch for now.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton
.
If however, there is another LOCK_SH lock on the file, we're out of
luck. We've removed our LOCK_SH lock already and can't insert a LOCK_EX
lock.
Fix this by ensuring that we don't remove any lock that we're replacing
until we're sure that we can add its replacement.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton
We don't want to remove all leases just because one filp was closed.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 59eadd416b8c..c748176fde6a 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b
one.
...remove the drop the spinlock code in the middle of this function as
it has always been suspicious.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 10 --
1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
diff --git
18:02:02
-0800)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.samba.org/jlayton/linux.git tags/locks-v3.20-2
for you to fetch changes up to c07ef59a2e7f768ec39fb9c93419e27d09698e22:
locks: only remove leases associated with the file being closed (2015-02-17
06:59:42 -0500)
Jeff
not be fabricated from the same set of
directories in the same order.
David
--
Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 12:03:43 +1300
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:38:31 -0400 Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
wrote:
Ensure that it's OK to pass in a NULL file_lock double pointer on
a F_UNLCK request and convert the vfs_setlease F_UNLCK callers to
do just
of testing on it today and send it
along to Linus in the next day or so.
Thanks!
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
pgpjsqtSq1MIW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
offhand, but I'll keep
looking at it.
Just to be clear -- were there any exotic filesystems involved here?
In particular any that define a -flock inode operation (e.g. NFS) ?
Thanks for the report...
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:27:23 -0800
Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 10:34:17AM -0800, Jeff Layton wrote:
...instead of open-coding it and removing flock locks directly. This
simplifies some coming interim changes in the following patches when
we have
that up for the next iteration.
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http
insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http
it may be easiest to pull this in early.
Jeff Layton (13):
locks: add new struct list_head to struct file_lock
locks: have locks_release_file use flock_lock_file to release generic
flock locks
locks: add a new struct
...that we can use to queue file_locks to per-ctx list_heads. Go ahead
and convert locks_delete_lock and locks_dispose_list to use it instead
of the fl_block list.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 8 +---
include/linux/fs.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 6
Now that we use standard list_heads for tracking leases, we can have
lm_change take a pointer to the lease to be modified instead of a
double pointer.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 13 ++---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 2 +-
include/linux/fs.h
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/ceph/locks.c | 58 +---
fs/cifs/file.c | 26 +
fs/lockd/svcsubs.c | 20 ++
fs/locks.c | 108 +++-
fs/nfs/delegation.c | 27
is
added to it, and it's only freed when the inode is freed. Assignment
of the pointer is done without locking using a compare and swap
operation.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/inode.c | 3 ++-
fs/locks.c | 37
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 251 +
include/linux/fs.h | 5 +-
2 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index fadf50297e5c..acfad02bc136 100644
We can now add a dedicated spinlock without expanding struct inode.
Change to using that to protect the various i_flctx lists. We do still
use the i_lock to protect the i_flctx pointer itself, but once the
context is assigned to the inode we no longer need it.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay
This makes things a bit more efficient in the cifs and ceph lock
pushing code.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/ceph/locks.c| 11 ++-
fs/cifs/file.c | 14 --
fs/locks.c | 38 ++
include/linux/fs.h
Nothing uses it anymore. Also add a forward declaration for struct
file_lock to silence some compiler warnings that the removal triggers.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
include/linux/fs.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/ceph/locks.c | 28 ---
fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 4
fs/locks.c | 53 +---
fs/nfs/delegation.c | 18 --
fs/nfs/nfs4state.c | 42
...instead of open-coding it and removing flock locks directly. This
simplifies some coming interim changes in the following patches when
we have different file_lock types protected by different spinlocks.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 49
Jeff Layton (10):
locks: add new struct list_head to struct file_lock
locks: have locks_release_file use flock_lock_file to release generic
flock locks
locks: add a new struct file_locking_context pointer to struct inode
locks: move flock locks to file_lock_context
locks: convert posix
(#3)
Just a single patch to fix a memory leak that Daniel Wagner discovered
while doing some testing with leases.
Jeff Layton (1):
locks: fix fasync_struct memory leak in lease upgrade/downgrade handling
fs/locks.c | 3 ++-
1
of __locks_insert/delete_block() and it's posix version
- added seqfile helpers to avoid ugly open coded version
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/2/351
Cc: Alexander Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
Cc: J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org
Cc: linux-fsde
On Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:00:41 -0500
Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net wrote:
On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:53:30 +0100
Daniel Wagner daniel.wag...@bmw-carit.de wrote:
Hi,
Finally, I got a bigger machine and did a quick test round. I expected
to see some improvements but the resutls do
with the legacy format.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 7 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 49d240874d4e..4347f3dc17cc 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -2565,15 +2565,10 @@ static
NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 21 -
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 0915a3ead897..7be49ad1c902 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -203,11 +203,11 @@ static struct
the i_flctx field used cmpxchg
to assign it, but I ended up taking that out due to a problem that Sasha
Levin reported. I now think that I misunderstood the problem and that
using cmpxchg for that should be ok.
Jeff Layton (4):
locks: don't allocate a lock context for an F_UNLCK request
locks
of flock_lock_file,
you could end up with multiple flock locks for the same struct file
on the inode.
Reinstate the use of a CAS operation to assign this pointer since it's
likely to be more efficient and gets the i_lock completely out of the
file locking business.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay
the callers
deal with assigning the values to the file_lock structs.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 8 +---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 18 ++
include/linux/fs.h | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git
...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: Jeff Layton jlay...@poochiereds.net
Cc: J. Bruce Fields bfie...@fieldses.org
Cc: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov gorcu...@openvz.org
Cc: Pavel Emelyanov xe...@parallels.com
Signed-off-by: Andrey Vagin ava...@openvz.org
It's possible that fl won't point at a valid lock at this point, so
have it instead point at victim which is either a valid lock or NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jeff.lay...@primarydata.com
---
fs/locks.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs
1101 - 1200 of 4603 matches
Mail list logo
