[lustre-devel] [PATCH 06/28] lustre: ldlm: ELC shouldn't wait on lock flush

From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 06/28] lustre: ldlm: ELC shouldn't wait on lock flush
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 14:44:38 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mur68x21.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.21.1810201808100.16676@casper.infradead.org>

On Sat, Oct 20 2018, James Simmons wrote:

>> On Sun, Oct 14 2018, James Simmons wrote:
>> 
>> > From: Andriy Skulysh <c17819@cray.com>
>> >
>> > The commit 08fd034670b5 ("staging: lustre: ldlm: revert the changes
>> > for lock canceling policy") removed the fix for LU-4300 when lru_resize
>> > is disabled.
>> >
>> > Introduce ldlm_cancel_aged_no_wait_policy to be used by ELC.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andriy Skulysh <c17819@cray.com>
>> > WC-bug-id: https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-8578
>> > Seagate-bug-id: MRP-3662
>> > Reviewed-on: https://review.whamcloud.com/22286
>> > Reviewed-by: Vitaly Fertman <c17818@cray.com>
>> > Reviewed-by: Patrick Farrell <paf@cray.com>
>> > Reviewed-by: Oleg Drokin <green@whamcloud.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_internal.h |  1 -
>> >  drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_request.c  | 51 +++++++++++++++-------
>> >  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_internal.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_internal.h
>> > index 1d7c727..709c527 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_internal.h
>> > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_internal.h
>> > @@ -96,7 +96,6 @@ enum {
>> >  	LDLM_LRU_FLAG_NO_WAIT	= BIT(4), /* Cancel locks w/o blocking (neither
>> >  					   * sending nor waiting for any rpcs)
>> >  					   */
>> > -	LDLM_LRU_FLAG_LRUR_NO_WAIT = BIT(5), /* LRUR + NO_WAIT */
>> >  };
>> >  
>> >  int ldlm_cancel_lru(struct ldlm_namespace *ns, int nr,
>> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_request.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_request.c
>> > index 80260b07..3eb5036 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_request.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_request.c
>> > @@ -579,8 +579,8 @@ int ldlm_prep_elc_req(struct obd_export *exp, struct ptlrpc_request *req,
>> >  		req_capsule_filled_sizes(pill, RCL_CLIENT);
>> >  		avail = ldlm_capsule_handles_avail(pill, RCL_CLIENT, canceloff);
>> >  
>> > -		flags = ns_connect_lru_resize(ns) ?
>> > -			LDLM_LRU_FLAG_LRUR_NO_WAIT : LDLM_LRU_FLAG_AGED;
>> > +		flags = LDLM_LRU_FLAG_NO_WAIT | ns_connect_lru_resize(ns) ?
>> > +			LDLM_LRU_FLAG_LRUR : LDLM_LRU_FLAG_AGED;
>> >  		to_free = !ns_connect_lru_resize(ns) &&
>> >  			  opc == LDLM_ENQUEUE ? 1 : 0;
>> 
>> Bug.
>> The commit in SFS-lustre (7ca60f33893) is correct, but you dropped the
>> parentheses which introduces a bug.
>> 
>> While the SFS code is correct, it is formatted badly.
>> It should be
>> 
>> 	lru_flags = LDLM_LRU_FLAG_NO_WAIT |
>>         	(ns_connect_lru_resize(ns) ?
>>                  LDLM_LRU_FLAG_LRUR : LDLM_LRU_FLAG_AGED);
>> or similar.
>
> Thanks for finding that. Shall I submit another patch to fix that or will
> you fix it up when you apply it to lustre-testing?

I've fixed up the patch - thanks.

NeilBrown
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20181022/8578fbac/attachment.sig>