On Don, 2010-05-27 at 10:18 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:46 +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
[...]
> > On Don, 2010-05-27 at 08:34 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 12:11 +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > How can I debug fcntl() file locks on a NFSv3-client?
> > > > The server side is a NetApp-Box (no details at hand but I can ask).
> > > > The client side are stock-RHEL5.3/CentOS-5.3 kernels - 2.6.18-92.el5.
> > > >
> > > > The file system in question is mounted on 2 clients. flock() on a file
> > > > succeeds but fcntl() fails with EAGAIN. From what I found in the
> > > > Internet and manual pages, this means that someone else already locked
> > > > that file (- the file is successfully open()ed read/write so it can't be
> > > > "your are not allowed to write-lock the file").
> > > > But how do I find out on which host and which process?
> > > >
> > > > strace shows:
> > > > ---- snip ----
> > > > open("/... secret ...", O_RDWR) = 3
> > > > ioctl(3, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE or TCGETS, 0x7fff7925b400) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)
> > > > lseek(3, 0, SEEK_CUR) = 0
> > > > fstat(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0600, st_size=935, ...}) = 0
> > > > fcntl(3, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
> > > > flock(3, LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB) = 0
> > > > fcntl(3, F_SETLK, {type=F_WRLCK, whence=SEEK_SET, start=0, len=0}) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
> > > > ---- snip ----
> > > > [ This is a perl script using CPAN modules at the top. ]
> > [...]
> > > The Linux NFS client does not allow you to lock a file using both
> > > flock() and POSIX locks. You should choose one or the other locking
> > > scheme. If you remove the flock() line above, then the POSIX lock will
> > > likely succeed.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Does flock() work on NFS these days on NFS?
> > Historically that was not the case IIRC.
>
> Yes. flock() has worked since the early 2.6.x series, however it uses
> the same NFS byte range lock protocol as POSIX locks, so there is no way
> to avoid conflicts.
IMHO this is the saner approach - treat flock() and fcntl()-locking the
same with just different APIs/interfaces. But there are probably more
(historically grown) differences.
And other filesystems - especially ext3 - allow this "duplicate locking"
- at least for /dev/null.
Said script is trying that to check if fcntl() can be used after flock()
or not.
Not that I find that a particularly good solution because
- there is no check if /dev/null is on the same filesystem as the
to-be-locked files and
- is locking a special char device the same as a plain file.
Bernd
--
mobile: +43 664 4416156 http://www.sysprog.at/
Linux Software Development, Consulting and Services
--
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
