On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 08:48:26PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Fri, 2016-09-23 at 17:05 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 04:28:22PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > > > v3: > > > - add NFS4_OPEN_RESULT_MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK in a separate patch > > > > > > v2: > > > - small bugfixes > > > > > > Very minor update to the patchset I sent a week or so ago. The only real > > > difference from the last is to move the addition of > > > NFS4_OPEN_RESULT_MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK to a separate patch. > > > > > > The basic idea is to just add support for CB_NOTIFY_LOCK callbacks, > > > which just tell the client that it may want to retry a lock again > > > once it becomes available. > > > > > > Tested in conjunction with the corresponding client-side patch > > > series. > > > > What sort of test were you doing? > > > > I did several: cthon (of course), the lockperf suite (which still takes > quite a while to run). Mostly I just verified that I got callbacks when > expected and that the client acted on them using wireshark. Some testing > under more load would be great. > > > Have you checked with wireshark's CB_NOTIFY_LOCK support is complete? > > > > Just recently fixed: > > https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=commitdiff;h=1948f7bd7553f215dc2519a35dcd62e29e35a614 Excellent, thanks! --b. -- 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
