On Nov 20, 2009, at 5:05 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
On Nov 20, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 13:23 -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
+ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(rpcb_create_local_lock);
+ struct rpc_clnt *clnt, *clnt4;
+ int result = 0;
+
+ spin_lock(&rpcb_create_local_lock);
+ if (rpcb_local_clnt)
+ goto out;
+
+ clnt = rpc_create(&args);
+ if (IS_ERR(clnt)) {
+ result = -PTR_ERR(clnt);
+ goto out;
+ }
- return rpc_create(&args);
+ clnt4 = rpc_bind_new_program(clnt, &rpcb_program, RPCBVERS_4);
+ if (IS_ERR(clnt4)) {
+ result = -PTR_ERR(clnt4);
+ rpc_shutdown_client(clnt);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ rpcb_local_clnt = clnt;
+ rpcb_local_clnt4 = clnt4;
+
+out:
+ spin_unlock(&rpcb_create_local_lock);
+ return result;
}
You can't have tested this. At the very least you cannot have done
so
with spinlock debugging enabled...
I moved the rpcb_create_local_lock spinlock out of the function,
enabled
every spinlock checkbox I could under kernel hacking,
Including CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP?
Yes. I even rebuilt the kernel under test from scratch.
and gave the guest
2 CPUs. The spinlock checker reported a problem almost immediately
with
XFS (even with just one virtual CPU), so I know it's enabled and
working.
I can't reproduce any problems with the rpcbind upcall here. Do you
have anything more specific?
Isn't there an rpc ping in rpc_bind_new_program?
Hrm, I suppose there is. That's weird, clearly I didn't see the
rpc_ping() call, even though I was looking for it when I wrote this.
A GFP_KERNEL memory allocation can sleep too, can't it?
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
--
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
