From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1768669Ab2KOSeS (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55083 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2993480Ab2KOSeQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 13:34:08 -0500 From: Jeff Layton To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Stanislav Kinsbursky , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, devel@openvz.org, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/15] NFSd state containerization Message-ID: <20121115133408.23db9ebb@corrin.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20121114220036.GD539@fieldses.org> References: <20121114152018.4708.63125.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20121114220036.GD539@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:00:36 -0500 "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 06:20:59PM +0300, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote: > > This patch set is my first attempt to containerize NFSv4 state - i.e. make it > > works in networks namespace context. > > I admit, that some of this new code could be partially rewritten during future > > NFSd containerization. > > But the overall idea look more or less correct to me. > > So, the main things here are: > > 1) making nfs4_client network namespace aware. > > 2) Allocating all hashes (except file_hashtbl and reclaim_str_hashtbl) per > > network namespace context on NFSd start (not init) and destroying on NFSd > > state shutdown. > > 3) Allocating of reclaim_str_hashtbl on legacy tracker start and destroying on > > legacy tracker stop. > > 4) Moving of client_lru and close_lru lists to per-net data. > > 5) Making lundromat network namespace aware. > > These look OK and pass my tests. Jeff, do the revised recovery bits > look OK? > > Have you done any testing? > > It'd be interesting, for example, to know if there are any pynfs that > fail against the server in a non-init network namespace, but pass > normally. > > --b. > I looked over the patches and they look sane to me. I move that they go into your -next branch to soak for a bit. Cheers, -- Jeff Layton