From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1761080AbXIUQUW@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1761080AbXIUQUW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:20:22 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759275AbXIUQUK
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:20:10 -0400
Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]:40924 "EHLO
	wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1759410AbXIUQUI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:20:08 -0400
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=bR29nWf6TwZO8pNewQIK9rB0JhXdNzzlNS9pi1WfGS/otUJRdst9C+rOMu3YVtS+UZemR8mTdxce9UkJcSh3Eqw5zr1XLVvCdDbMwY3huOiJNsv46bU/Bb88jzFAo9cg/uKqeVrN4mwX6UvCKGahfICnvrV4+bGxKsgjvfBd4U0=
Message-ID: <92cbf19b0709210920p3647788dl11d8c4e0cee1f70f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 09:20:06 -0700
From: "Chakri n" <chakriin5@gmail.com>
To: "Trond Myklebust" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: [NFS] NFS on loopback locks up entire system(2.6.23-rc6)?
Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <1190384005.6680.20.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <92cbf19b0709201722k6265e647x31b7d25bc54b63a0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1190335423.6763.180.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
	 <92cbf19b0709202012s375c6f54m588987b4bbf552bc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1190384005.6680.20.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Thanks.

I was using flock (BSD locking) and I think the problem should be
solved if I move my application to use POSIX locks.

And any option to avoid processes waiting indefinitely to free pages
from NFS requests waiting on unresponsive NFS server?

Thanks
--Chakri

On 9/21/07, Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 20:12 -0700, Chakri n wrote:
> > Thanks Trond, for clarifying this for me.
> >
> > I have seen similar behavior when a remote NFS server is not
> > available. Many processes wait end up waiting in nfs_release_page. So,
> > what will happen if the remote server is not available,
> > nfs_release_page cannot free the memory since it waits on rpc request
> > to complete, which never completes and processes wait in there for
> > ever?
> >
> > And unfortunately in my case, I cannot use "mount --bind". I want to
> > use the same file system from two different nodes, and I want file &
> > record locking to be consistent. The only way to make sure locking is
> > consistent is to use loopback NFS on 1 host and NFS mount the same
> > file system on other nodes, so that NFS server ensures file & record
> > locking to be consistent. Is there any alternative to this?
> >
> > Is it possible or any efforts to integrate ext3 or other local file
> > systems locking & network file system locking, so that user can use
> > "mount --bind" on local host and NFS mount on remote nodes, but file &
> > record locking will be consistent between both the nodes?
>
> Could you be a bit more specific? Is the problem that your application
> is using BSD locks (flock()) instead of POSIX locks?
>
> Cheers
>    Trond
>