[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Cluster-devel] Re: [NFS] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover



On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 05:50:55PM -0400, Wendy Cheng wrote:
> Revised patches based on 2.6.21-rc4 kernel and nfs-utils-1.1.0-rc1 that 
> address issues discussed in:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2006-September/msg00034.html
> 
> Quick How-to:
> 1) Failover server exports filesystem with "fsid" option as:
>     /etc/exports entry> /mnt/shared/exports *(fsid=1234,sync,rw)
> 2) Failover server dispatch rpc.statd with "-H" option.
> 3) Failover server drops locks based on fsid by:
>     shell> echo 1234 > /proc/fs/nfsd/nlm_unlock
> 4) Takeover server enters per fsid grace period by:
>     shell> echo 1234 > /proc/fs/nfsd/nlm_set_igrace
> 5) Takeover server notifies clients for lock reclaim by:
>     shell> /usr/sbin/sm-notify -f -v floating_ip_address -P an_sm_directory
> 
> Patch Summary:
> 4-1: implement /proc/fs/nfsd/nlm_unlock
> 4-2: implement /proc/fs/nfsd/nlm_set_igrace
> 4-3: correctly record and pass incoming server ip interface into rpc.statd.
> 4-4: nfs-utils statd changes
> 4-1 includes an existing lockd bug fix as discussed in:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=4603506D.5040807%40redhat.com&forum_name=nfs
> (subject: [NFS] Question about f_count in struct nlm_file)

That's the one separate chunk in nlm_traverse_files()?  Could you keep
that split out as a separate patch?  I see that it got some discussion
before but I'm not clear what the resolution was....

--b.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]