06.10.2011 20:46, J. Bruce Fields пишет:
On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 01:59:09PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
05.10.2011 22:19, J. Bruce Fields пишет:
To start with I suspect it would be OK to share the one lockd thread.
Yep, I think so too. It just will be harder to implement.
Why do you think it will be harder to implement?
Because making lockd kthread per net ns is very easy. :)
There may be something about how tasks and namespaces interact that I'm
missing here....
The main problem, as I see it now, is creating and especially destroying lockd
rpcbind clients (and per ns data) on CT stop.
Right now they are destroyed on lockd kthread exit. And we can't make this
destruction in per-net operations since those clients holds net ns.
Thus, nlmclnt_init(done) logic have to be significantly reworked.
To me it seems like either way we're going to have to add the network
namespace as an argument to any data structure lookups that we're doing,
and it doesn't really matter whether we get the namespace out of the
svc_rqst or someplace else.
Yep, seems the same to me.
--b.
--
Best regards,
Stanislav Kinsbursky
--
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
