Hello, I'd like to understand the state of Linux's NFSv4 server regarding the NFSv4 spec's _optional_ ordered blocking lock list implementation. Without something like the following patch isn't there still concern for NFSv4 clients being starved from ever getting a conflicting lock (local POSIX or lockd waiters would race to get it first)? "fair queuing" in Linux's fs/locks.c was developed but the patch was never merged upstream: http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/nfsv4/linux/kernel-patches/2.6.13-1/linux-2.6.13-032-locks-posix-fair-queue.dif http://wiki.linux-nfs.org/wiki/index.php/Cluster_Coherent_NFS_and_Byte_Range_Locking http://www.eisler.com/2008-05-09/draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-23.html#blocking_locks I'd also like to understand: what Linux NFSv4.1 support is intended for the _optional_ CB_NOTIFY_LOCK?: 20.11. Operation 13: CB_NOTIFY_LOCK - Notify of possible lock availability: http://www.eisler.com/2008-05-09/draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-23.html#OP_CB_NOTIFY_LOCK Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks, Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
