On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> From: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The MDS may have incorrect wanted caps after importing caps. So the
> client should check the value mds has and send cap update if necessary.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ceph/caps.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/caps.c b/fs/ceph/caps.c
> index 7e90299..16c10f8 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/caps.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/caps.c
> @@ -2425,10 +2425,12 @@ static void handle_cap_grant(struct inode *inode, struct ceph_mds_caps *grant,
> ceph_cap_string(used),
> ceph_cap_string(dirty));
> if (wanted != le32_to_cpu(grant->wanted)) {
> - dout("mds wanted %s -> %s\n",
> - ceph_cap_string(le32_to_cpu(grant->wanted)),
> - ceph_cap_string(wanted));
> - grant->wanted = cpu_to_le32(wanted);
Doh, this was a holdover from when we used to re-use the incoming message
and send it back out over the wire.
> + dout("mds wanted = %s\n",
> + ceph_cap_string(le32_to_cpu(grant->wanted)));
Any reason to drop the "old -> new" output?
> + /* imported cap may not have correct mds_wanted */
> + if (cap == ci->i_auth_cap &&
> + (wanted & ~(cap->mds_wanted | cap->issued)))
> + check_caps = 1;
I think we want
if (cap == ci->i_auth_cap)
check_caps = 1;
If we want more caps, check_caps will request immediately. If we have
extra, we'll put the cap on the delay list.
sage
> }
>
> cap->seq = seq;
> --
> 1.7.11.7
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
