> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 03:01:56PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 01:14:53PM -0600, David Teigland wrote: > > Also, since flc is never actually handed to the posix lock system, I > > think it should be a "shallow" lock copy--so it should be created with > > __locks_copy_lock(). Something like the below? > (I'd like to do the s/locks_copy_lock/__locks_copy_lock/ in a separate > patch since it's not directly related to fixing the bug.) I haven't looked at why, but s/locks_copy_lock/__locks_copy_lock/ creates problems with the file_lock's kept by the vfs. With two programs doing locking on an nfs client I get lots of messages like this on the server: dlm: dlm_plock_callback: vfs lock error -11 num 20573 file ffff88007e16a818 fl ffff88007dc796b0 dlm: dlm_plock_callback: vfs lock error -11 num 2055f file ffff88007e16a818 fl ffff88007dc796b0 dlm: dlm_plock_callback: vfs lock error -11 num 2058b file ffff880017cf56d0 fl ffff88007e566750 dlm: dlm_plock_callback: vfs lock error -11 num 2055c file ffff88007e16a818 fl ffff88007e566750 (code modified to report the -11 / -EAGAIN) And /proc/locks on the server has entries that look like: 54: POSIX *NOINODE* WRITE 8682 <none>:0 5 9 55: POSIX *NOINODE* READ 8682 <none>:0 0 4 56: POSIX *NOINODE* READ 8682 <none>:0 0 4 57: POSIX *NOINODE* READ 8682 <none>:0 5 9 58: POSIX *NOINODE* READ 8682 <none>:0 5 9 59: POSIX *NOINODE* WRITE 8682 <none>:0 0 4 My tests are looking good using the current locks_copy_lock(), so I plan to just stick with that. Dave -- 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
