From: Juan Gomez <juang@us.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
willy@www.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: Proposal for new lock ownership scheme to support NFS over distributed filesystems
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:34:07 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <OF189FE435.22D1CABF-ON87256C63.00761152@us.ibm.com> (raw)
Sure I can also cc that list.
Regarding your comments I do have a test implementation that takes care of
storing files_struct for local locks so this is not a problem.
(By the way, the use of that field to store that seems very bad idea imho)
Regarding IPv4 not being the only protocol, I would say yes that is a
problem and in fact I the one solution to this would be to enlarge
fl_owner field, but thats a lot of work.
In any case my main problem is to find a unique node identifier that is not
bound to the underlying protocol you are using without requiring
clustering between the nodes that are participating as part of nas head,
suggestions on how to create a clean portable solution are welcome.
Juan
|---------+---------------------------->
| | Matthew Wilcox |
| | <willy@debian.org|
| | > |
| | Sent by: |
| | <willy@www.linux.|
| | org.uk> |
| | |
| | |
| | 10/31/02 01:08 PM|
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Juan Gomez/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS |
| cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org |
| Subject: Re: Proposal for new lock ownership scheme to support NFS over distributed filesystems |
| |
| |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Hey, how about cc'ing either me or linux-fsdevel when discussing file
locking in the future as described in MAINTAINERS?
Your idea doesn't work because we need fl_owner to be the files_struct
for local locks. It also doesn't work because IPv4 is not the only
protocol which NFS runs over.
--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
next reply other threads:[~2002-10-31 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-31 21:34 Juan Gomez [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-31 21:08 Matthew Wilcox
2002-10-31 18:05 Juan Gomez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=OF189FE435.22D1CABF-ON87256C63.00761152@us.ibm.com \
--to=juang@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
--cc=willy@www.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®