Sorry I was too busy last week to look at this. The change you propose
is correct.
jim
Pavel Filipensky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> can I get a code review for 6861594 NFSv4 client Deadlock: cycle in
> blocking chain at nfs4_move_mi
>
> Webrev:
>
> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~pavelf/6861594/
>
>
> Backgr
Hey Rick,
you are right, I have realized it few hours ago, but just now I have
finished the new webrev and updated the bugster.
Please check it again.
Thanks,
Pavel
Rick Mesta wrote:
> Hey Pavel,
>
>My only concern w/removing the hold/rele pair is that you
> cannot guarante
Yup, I think that takes care of it, Pavel =^)
rick
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:19:20PM +0200, Pavel Filipensky wrote:
| Hey Rick,
|
| you are right, I have realized it few hours ago, but just now I have
| finished the new webrev and updated the bugster.
|
| Please check
Hey Pavel,
My only concern w/removing the hold/rele pair is that you
cannot guarantee that the nfs4_server_t doesn't disappear
from underneath you, since you don't explicitly hold it. Is
this a concern ? (Maybe you've already thought about that)
Hi,
can I get a code review for 6861594 NFSv4 client Deadlock: cycle in
blocking chain at nfs4_move_mi
Webrev:
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~pavelf/6861594/
Background:
If there are two threads doing a failover for differnet mounts at the
same time, both of them need to grab
the s_lock for the
