On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 06:05:33PM +0800, Mi Jinlong wrote: > > > J. Bruce Fields : > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 05:42:18PM +0800, Mi Jinlong wrote: > >> > >> J. Bruce Fields: > >>> Our current NFS implementation just isn't designed to be able to shut > >>> down some components while leaving others running. > >> Really? But the lockd started with nfs service start, but not nfslock service. > >> And, lockd can't stop with statd at the same time. > >> Sometimes, the lockd will not synchronous with statd. Maybe this problem is a good example. > > > > I'm sorry, I still don't understand. > > > > Please take a look at section 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 of the nfs-utils README > > file. That describes the order in which servers should be started and > > stopped. > > Maybe that's my problem. > The status of lockd and statd, when testing. > > lockd statd > | | <== service nfslock stop > get KILL signal stopd ^ > and get into grace_period | | I believe you also need to shut down nfsd here. --b. > | | | more than grace_period time > | | v > | | <== service nfslock start > normal state | > | start Client receive SM_NOTIFY and reclaime lock, > | | but out of grace_period time. > v v > > As above, after nfslock service start, client cannot reclaime lock success. -- 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
