mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op?
@ 2002-10-10  0:07 Juan Gomez
  2002-10-10  0:28 ` Trond Myklebust
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juan Gomez @ 2002-10-10  0:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alan Cox; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-kernel-owner, nfs





Oh ok. Well can we resuscitate this patch? The AFS NAS head example is a
good reason to do this.
If you need any help please let me know and I will be happy to test/adapt
the patch in/to the version that you may want to apply it.
We have one version for 2.4.18 that someone created recently if the one you
have is too old...

Thanks, Juan




|---------+---------------------------------->
|         |           Alan Cox               |
|         |           <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.|
|         |           uk>                    |
|         |           Sent by:               |
|         |           linux-kernel-owner@vger|
|         |           .kernel.org            |
|         |                                  |
|         |                                  |
|         |           10/09/02 04:32 PM      |
|         |                                  |
|---------+---------------------------------->
  >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                             |
  |       To:       Juan Gomez/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS                                                                                |
  |       cc:       nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>                         |
  |       Subject:  Re: Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op?                                           |
  |                                                                                                                             |
  |                                                                                                                             |
  >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|



On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 00:11, Juan Gomez wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Could anyone remind me of why NFS kernel would not pass byte range lock
> requests to the underlying filsystem at the server side?
> I think another person at IBM (Brian?) submitted a patch for this but
such
> patch never got included in the distribution.

I know Matthew had the patches, and I know I looked at them and they
seemed sane enough. But I don't know where they eventually went. Things
like NFS over AFS are going to need it

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op?
  2002-10-10  0:07 Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op? Juan Gomez
@ 2002-10-10  0:28 ` Trond Myklebust
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Trond Myklebust @ 2002-10-10  0:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Juan Gomez; +Cc: Alan Cox, linux-kernel, linux-kernel-owner, nfs

>>>>> " " == Juan Gomez <juang@us.ibm.com> writes:

     > Oh ok. Well can we resuscitate this patch? The AFS NAS head
     > example is a good reason to do this.  If you need any help

If you do, make sure that you get the latest patch from Brian and
*NOT* the one that was in earlier versions of the -ac tree. The
latter screws lockd quite royally...

Cheers,
  Trond

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op?
  2002-10-09 23:11 Juan Gomez
@ 2002-10-09 23:32 ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2002-10-09 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Juan Gomez; +Cc: nfs, Linux Kernel Mailing List

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 00:11, Juan Gomez wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could anyone remind me of why NFS kernel would not pass byte range lock
> requests to the underlying filsystem at the server side?
> I think another person at IBM (Brian?) submitted a patch for this but such
> patch never got included in the distribution.

I know Matthew had the patches, and I know I looked at them and they
seemed sane enough. But I don't know where they eventually went. Things
like NFS over AFS are going to need it


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op?
@ 2002-10-09 23:11 Juan Gomez
  2002-10-09 23:32 ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juan Gomez @ 2002-10-09 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: nfs; +Cc: linux-kernel





Could anyone remind me of why NFS kernel would not pass byte range lock
requests to the underlying filsystem at the server side?
I think another person at IBM (Brian?) submitted a patch for this but such
patch never got included in the distribution.

I think a patch to pass lock requests to the underlying filesystem does not
affect single node NFS servers and it enables us to
support clustered Linux-based NAS heads over distributed file systems.

Juan


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2002-10-10  0:22 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-10-10  0:07 Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op? Juan Gomez
2002-10-10  0:28 ` Trond Myklebust
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-09 23:11 Juan Gomez
2002-10-09 23:32 ` Alan Cox

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®