From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
Cc: Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Include OFD lock owners when looking up state
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:47:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHQdGtQ34HGqNLEh=mPPVhuOc9akkd9F--EdsA=y07isbO=KNg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1459512819.git.bcodding@redhat.com>
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Benjamin Coddington
<bcodding@redhat.com> wrote:
> The client sends IO only under the open stateid when using OFD (and flock)
> locking instead of the appropriate lock stateid because the nfs_lock_context
> only tracks POSIX lockowners, which is the reference to the process' file
> table.
>
> This is a problem for two reasons. The first is that rfc7530,
> section-9.1.4.5 states that IO sent by an entity corresponding to the
> lock-owner which holds a byte-range lock should be sent under the lock
> stateid for that lock. Otherwise, a server enforcing mandatory byte-range
> locking might reject that operation. Secondly, not tracking OFD lock owners
> means that accounting for IO sent under those owners is broken. That
> creates a problem for some work to guarantee an unlock will be sent after
> operations scheduled under a lock complete.
OK. Can we just kill this in the bud? No support for OFD locks in NFS:
this is nuts....
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-01 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-01 15:34 [PATCH 0/3] Include OFD lock owners when looking up state Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 15:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] NFS: add get_nfs_lock_context, find_nfs_lock_context Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 16:45 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-01 17:03 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-01 15:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] NFS: add OFD lock owners to nfs_lock_context Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 16:17 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-01 16:55 ` kbuild test robot
2016-04-01 15:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] NFSv4: use OFD lock owners in lock state lookup Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 15:47 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2016-04-01 15:48 ` [PATCH 0/3] Include OFD lock owners when looking up state Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 16:09 ` Trond Myklebust
2016-04-01 16:19 ` Jeff Layton
2016-04-01 20:24 ` Frank Filz
2016-04-01 16:35 ` Benjamin Coddington
2016-04-01 16:09 ` Jeff Layton
2016-04-01 17:17 ` Benjamin Coddington
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHQdGtQ34HGqNLEh=mPPVhuOc9akkd9F--EdsA=y07isbO=KNg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=trond.myklebust@primarydata.com \
--cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.