Re: [PATCH RFC v15 11/11] NFSD: Show state of courtesy clients in client info

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 3/9/22 12:51 PM, dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 3/9/22 12:14 PM, Chuck Lever III wrote:

On Mar 4, 2022, at 7:37 PM, Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Update client_info_show to show state of courtesy client
and time since last renew.

Signed-off-by: Dai Ngo <dai.ngo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 9 ++++++++-
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index bced09014e6b..ed14e0b54537 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -2439,7 +2439,8 @@ static int client_info_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
{
    struct inode *inode = m->private;
    struct nfs4_client *clp;
-    u64 clid;
+    u64 clid, hrs;
+    u32 mins, secs;

    clp = get_nfsdfs_clp(inode);
    if (!clp)
@@ -2451,6 +2452,12 @@ static int client_info_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
        seq_puts(m, "status: confirmed\n");
    else
        seq_puts(m, "status: unconfirmed\n");
+    seq_printf(m, "courtesy client: %s\n",
+        test_bit(NFSD4_CLIENT_COURTESY, &clp->cl_flags) ? "yes" : "no");
I'm wondering if it would be more economical to combine this
output with the status output just before it so we have only
one of:

    seq_puts(m, "status: unconfirmed\n");

    seq_puts(m, "status: confirmed\n");

or

    seq_puts(m, "status: courtesy\n");

make sense, will fix.

On second thought, I think it's safer to keep this the same
since there might be scripts out there that depend on it.

-Dai




+    hrs = div_u64_rem(ktime_get_boottime_seconds() - clp->cl_time,
+                3600, &secs);
+    mins = div_u64_rem((u64)secs, 60, &secs);
+    seq_printf(m, "time since last renew: %02ld:%02d:%02d\n", hrs, mins, secs);
Thanks, this seems more friendly than what was here before.

However if we replace the fixed courtesy timeout with a
shrinker, I bet some courtesy clients might lie about for
many more that 99 hours. Perhaps the left-most format
specifier could be just "%lu" and the rest could be "%02u".

(ie, also turn the "d" into "u" to prevent ever displaying
a negative number of time units).

will fix.

I will wait for your review of the rest of the patches before
I submit v16.

Thanks,
-Dai



    seq_printf(m, "name: ");
    seq_quote_mem(m, clp->cl_name.data, clp->cl_name.len);
    seq_printf(m, "\nminor version: %d\n", clp->cl_minorversion);
--
2.9.5

--
Chuck Lever






[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux