We are starting to think about wave 2 of the code submission, which will be LAYOUTRETURN and callback handling. Current code does not correctly wait for outstanding LAYOUTGETS on CB_RECALL. Remembering that this is for whole file layouts with the forgetful model, my intent is to work on patches implementing the following. Let me know if anyone sees problems with this approach. On CB_RECALL, set a "barrier" equal to one less than the seqid embedded in the cb_recall stateid. Then, instead of waiting on any outstanding LAYOUTGETs whose seqid is less than the barrier, as required by the spec, we just drop any LAYOUTGET reply that has a seqid less than the barrier. Because we are using the forgetful model, this is functionally equivalent to waiting, and simpler. We similarly increase the barrier based on replies from LAYOUTRETURNs. The major issue I see with this approach is that we have to be very careful on reset of the stateid to either drain or detect outstanding LAYOUTGETS. We will still need to wait on outstanding IO within any existing layout. I suggest we use Benny's rpc waitq code, shifting it up into the submission branch. Thanks, Fred -- 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
