On 8/2/2014 22:05, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 8/2/2014 21:11, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 7/30/2014 09:34, Jeff Layton wrote:
>>>>> From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>> Preparation for removing the client_mutex.
>>>>>
>>>>> Convert the open owner hash table into a per-client table and protect it
>>>>> using the nfs4_client->cl_lock spin lock.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> fs/nfsd/netns.h | 1 -
>>>>> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 187 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
>>>>> fs/nfsd/state.h | 1 +
>>>>> 3 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/netns.h b/fs/nfsd/netns.h
>>>>> index a71d14413d39..e1f479c162b5 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/nfsd/netns.h
>>>>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/netns.h
>>>>> @@ -63,7 +63,6 @@ struct nfsd_net {
>>>>> struct rb_root conf_name_tree;
>>>>> struct list_head *unconf_id_hashtbl;
>>>>> struct rb_root unconf_name_tree;
>>>>> - struct list_head *ownerstr_hashtbl;
>>>>
>>>> I send a patch "NFSD: Rervert "knfsd: locks: flag NFSv4-owned locks"" before,
>>>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/64382
>>>>
>>>> nfsd needs the hashtbl to find the lockowner for locking by owner from
>>>> fl->fl_owner stored in struct file_lock, but without nfs_client.
>>>
>>> Why? We're not currently doing that.
>>
>> Although not doing that right now, but there is a bug for getting the right ld_owner
>> in nfs4_set_lock_denied.
>>
>> If denying locks, vfs don't copy fl->fl_lmops to the returned file_lock, so that,
>> fl->fl_lmops always be NULL, nfsd never return the owner who holds the conflock.
>>
>> If we want fix this problem, needs finding the lockowner from struct file_lock.
>
> Do we really care enough about fixing nfs4_set_lock_denied enough to
> do so at the cost of reducing overall scalability of locking state?
I just report this problem, don't think enough about the scalability.
> We will always be faking up the clientid etc for local locks. Are
> there any clients out there that actually inspect the clientid on a
> result of NFS4ERR_DENIED and that will break if we give them a fake
> for non-local locks?
Jeff has point the same problem of a non-nfs4_lockowner.
Maybe we should copy fl_lmops to conflock as before, nfsd can distinguish
the lockowner stored in struct file_lock by checking fl_lmops.
thanks,
Kinglong Mee
--
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
