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

Re: [Cluster-devel] gfs uevent and sysfs changes

On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 01:32:31PM -0500, david m. richter wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:31 PM, David Teigland <teigland redhat com> wrote:
> > Here are the compatibility aspects to the recent ideas about changes to
> > the user/kernel interface between gfs (1 & 2) and gfs_controld.
> >
> > . gfs_controld can remove id from hostdata string in mount options
> hi david,
> I know I'm a peripheral consumer of the cluster suite, but I thought
> I'd chime in and say that I am currently using the "id" as passed into
> the kernel in the hostdata string (I believe by mount.gfs2?) in my
> pNFS work.  does the above "gfs_controld can remove id from hostdata
> string" comment refer to something orthogonal, or would it affect what
> gets stored in the superblock's hostdata at mount time?


> ..hm, sorry, I don't have the code right in front of me, but is that
> "id" in the hostdata string the same thing as the mountgroup id?  if
> so, then my above worry about the hostdata string is moot, because if
> gfs_controld still has that info I can just make a downcall.

Yes, it's created in gfs_controld, and passed to mount.gfs via the
hostdata string which is then passed into the kernel during mount(2).

Previously, gfs-kernel (lock_dlm actually) would pass this id back up to
gfs_controld within the plock op structures.  This was because plock ops
for all gfs fs's were funnelled to gfs_controld through a single misc
device.  gfs_controld would match the op to a particular fs using the id.

The dlm does this now, using the lockspace id.


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