Re: NSM lock recovery fails too often

[Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>]

On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:15:13AM -0800, Lever, Charles wrote:
> i thought the purpose of moving NSM into the kernel was
> to eliminate the need for any user-level programs because
> sometimes they don't get run at reboot..?

Yes and no. I think there's a difference security wise between starting
an RPC service by default (such as statd) vs running a small utility
that sends out NSM notifications and exits when it's done.

I also think these RPC upcalls from kernel to user land are awfully ugly,
and the entire NSM protocol is completely overengineered. For a kernel
statd, all you need is the NULL procedure and the ability to process
SM_NOTIFY messages. The rest is simply not implemented.

> how does your recovery program handle this case?

It's fairly stubborn. As long as it can open a socket, it will retry
notification for as long as you tell it to (15 minutes by default,
but you can change that)

I forgot to mention in my previous message that the kernel-statd patch
requires Andreas Gruenbacher's sunrpc patch that lets you register
several RPC services on a single socket (originally written for his
nfsacl implementation)

Olaf
-- 
Olaf Kirch     |  Stop wasting entropy - start using predictable
okir@suse.de   |  tempfile names today!
---------------+ 


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs