2009/2/25 Chrissie Caulfield <ccaulfie@redhat.com>: > Xinwei Hu wrote: >> Hi Chrissie, >> >> You are right. It should be returned in errno. Also, it seems errno >> should positive as lksb.sb_status too. >> >> I modified the patch a little bit further. >> >> Any comments ? > > > Hi > > You're right ... this kernel-itis is catching! lksb status are indeed > positive and correct for returning as errno. > > I'll commit this patch Good. Thanks for taking care of this. > Thank you. > > Chrissie > >> 2009/2/25 Chrissie Caulfield <ccaulfie@redhat.com>: >>> Xinwei Hu wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> In clvmd-corosync, lock_resource calls dlm_ls_lock_wait with flags >>>> set to LKF_NOQUEUE. >>>> When LKF_NOQUEUE is set, the return code of dlm_ls_lock_wait is >>>> always 0, while the actual errno is in lksb.sb_status. >>>> >>>> This causes problem when using vgchange -aey or something like. >>>> >>>> I attached a patch to try to fix this issue. >>>> >>>> Please help to review. Thanks. >>> Hi >>> >>> You are correct, the functions do need to check the LKSB. Your patch >>> isn't quite right I don't think though - the lksb status should be >>> returned in errno as shown below: >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Chrissie > > _______________________________________________ > linux-lvm mailing list > linux-lvm@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm > read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/ > _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
