From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: J. Bruce Fields Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:31:39 -0000 Subject: [NFS] [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover In-Reply-To: <46321870.7000607@redhat.com> References: <46302C01.2060500@redhat.com> <17968.15370.88587.653447@notabene.brown> <46315EED.9020103@redhat.com> <17969.37229.250000.895316@notabene.brown> <20070427111513.GA25126@salusa.poochiereds.net> <17969.61232.323762.29003@notabene.brown> <20070427134248.GB25126@salusa.poochiereds.net> <20070427141710.GA11484@infradead.org> <20070427154259.GF32278@fieldses.org> <46321870.7000607@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070427163129.GI32278@fieldses.org> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 11:36:16AM -0400, Wendy Cheng wrote: > J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:17:10PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > >>In fact couldn't this be treated as a reexport with a NFSEXP_ flag > >>meaning drop all locks to avoid creating new interfaces? > >> > > > >Off hand, I can't see any reason why that wouldn't work. The code to > >handle it would probably go in fs/nfsd/export.c:svc_export_parse(). > > > > > Sign :( ... folks, we go back to the loop again. That *was* my first > proposal ... So you're talking about this and followups?: http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=115009204513790&w=2 I just took a look and couldn't find any complaints about that approach. Were they elsewhere? I understand the frustration. There's a balance betweeen on the one hand, being willing to throw out some hard work and start over if someone comes up with a real objection, and, on the other hand, sticking to a design when you're convinced it's right. I *really* appreciate good review, but I also try to avoid doing something I don't like just because it seems to be the only way to make somebody else happy.... If they've got a real point then I should be able to understand it. If not, then I risk doing all the work to make them happy just to throw it away because I can't defend the approach in the end, or because I find out I misunderstood their original point. (Then again, sometimes I do just have to trust somebody. And sometimes I guess learning who can be trusted about what is part of the process.) In this case I think the complaint about requiring fsid's on everything is legimate, and the original approach of using the export was sensible. But I haven't been paying as much attention as I should have, and I probably missed something. --b. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:31:29 -0400 Message-ID: <20070427163129.GI32278@fieldses.org> References: <46302C01.2060500@redhat.com> <17968.15370.88587.653447@notabene.brown> <46315EED.9020103@redhat.com> <17969.37229.250000.895316@notabene.brown> <20070427111513.GA25126@salusa.poochiereds.net> <17969.61232.323762.29003@notabene.brown> <20070427134248.GB25126@salusa.poochiereds.net> <20070427141710.GA11484@infradead.org> <20070427154259.GF32278@fieldses.org> <46321870.7000607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Neil Brown , cluster-devel@redhat.com, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, Jeff Layton To: Wendy Cheng Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhTM7-0006qj-KG for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:31:35 -0700 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214] helo=fieldses.org) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1HhTM8-00011C-Qz for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:31:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <46321870.7000607@redhat.com> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 11:36:16AM -0400, Wendy Cheng wrote: > J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:17:10PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > >>In fact couldn't this be treated as a reexport with a NFSEXP_ flag > >>meaning drop all locks to avoid creating new interfaces? > >> > > > >Off hand, I can't see any reason why that wouldn't work. The code to > >handle it would probably go in fs/nfsd/export.c:svc_export_parse(). > > > > > Sign :( ... folks, we go back to the loop again. That *was* my first > proposal ... So you're talking about this and followups?: http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=115009204513790&w=2 I just took a look and couldn't find any complaints about that approach. Were they elsewhere? I understand the frustration. There's a balance betweeen on the one hand, being willing to throw out some hard work and start over if someone comes up with a real objection, and, on the other hand, sticking to a design when you're convinced it's right. I *really* appreciate good review, but I also try to avoid doing something I don't like just because it seems to be the only way to make somebody else happy.... If they've got a real point then I should be able to understand it. If not, then I risk doing all the work to make them happy just to throw it away because I can't defend the approach in the end, or because I find out I misunderstood their original point. (Then again, sometimes I do just have to trust somebody. And sometimes I guess learning who can be trusted about what is part of the process.) In this case I think the complaint about requiring fsid's on everything is legimate, and the original approach of using the export was sensible. But I haven't been paying as much attention as I should have, and I probably missed something. --b. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs