From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754744AbcISJZy convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:25:54 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:15371 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754502AbcISJZu (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:25:50 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,361,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="10738478" From: "Dilger, Andreas" To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jan Kara CC: James Simmons , "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Drokin, Oleg" , Lustre Development List , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 030/124] staging: lustre: llite: Replace write mutex with range lock Thread-Topic: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 030/124] staging: lustre: llite: Replace write mutex with range lock Thread-Index: AQHSEezCDSQ/KC5ASkGV7hVDFp0QbKCA4HiAgAAgoQA= Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:25:48 +0000 Message-ID: <5FCA4C55-DF73-4AE8-8030-9A85B21A8A54@intel.com> References: <1474231143-4061-1-git-send-email-jsimmons@infradead.org> <1474231143-4061-31-git-send-email-jsimmons@infradead.org> <20160919072859.GA15407@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20160919072859.GA15407@kroah.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.252.21.111] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sep 19, 2016, at 09:28, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 04:37:29PM -0400, James Simmons wrote: >> + * Range lock is used to allow multiple threads writing a single shared >> + * file given each thread is writing to a non-overlapping portion of the >> + * file. >> + * >> + * Refer to the possible upstream kernel version of range lock by >> + * Jan Kara : https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/31/480 >> + * >> + * This file could later replaced by the upstream kernel version. > > It doesn't look like range_lock ever got accepted in the kernel tree, > any idea what happened to it? Having a per-filesystem lock type seems > odd to me... I've added Jan and linux-fsdevel to the CC list to see what interest there is in the range locking implementaion. At the time we added this to Lustre it appeared that this was moving nicely torward landing, but it seems to have stalled. I think the range locking implementation is fairly generic, and if there are other users in the kernel it could easily be pulled out of the staging dir into vfs/. I'm not against it going into vfs/ directly either, but not sure whether that is acceptable if the only user is in staging. Cheers, Andreas