RE: Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

RE: Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

[Chris Croswhite]

Philippe,

What patches are you refering to?

TIA,
Chris


-----Original Message-----
From:	Philippe Troin [mailto:phil@fifi.org]
Sent:	Tue 09-Dec-03 10:46
To:	Trond Myklebust
Cc:	Kenny Simpson; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; =
nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject:	[NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal =
process termination
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> writes:

> >>>>> " " =3D=3D Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
>=20
>      > From my reading of the patch, it supersedes the old patch, and
>      > is only
>      > necessary on the client. Is also does not compile :-)
>=20
> Yeah, I admit I didn't test it out...
>=20
>      > Here's an updated patch which does compile.
>=20
> Thanks.
>=20
>      > I am still running tests, but so far it looks good (that is all
>      > locks are freed when a process with locks running on a NFS
>      > client is killed).
>=20
> Good...

I've ran test overnight on four boxen, and no locks were lost.
I guess you can send this patch to Marcello now.

I've tested with the enclosed program.

=20
> There are still 2 other issues with the generic POSIX locking code.
> Both issues have to do with CLONE_VM and have been raised on
> linux-kernel & linux-fsdevel. Unfortunately they met with no response,
> so I'm unable to pursue...

Can we help? Pointers?

Phil.





-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Re: Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

[Philippe Troin]

"Chris Croswhite" <csc@cadence.com> writes:

> Philippe,
> 
> What patches are you refering to?

The one in <87llpms8yr.fsf@ceramic.fifi.org> named
linux-2.4.23-nfs-lock-race-2.patch 

Here a link to MARC, since the sourceforge mailing list web page
sucks:

  http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-nfs&m=107095817723325&w=2

Phil.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Philippe Troin [mailto:phil@fifi.org]
> Sent:	Tue 09-Dec-03 10:46
> To:	Trond Myklebust
> Cc:	Kenny Simpson; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject:	[NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination
> Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> writes:
> 
> > >>>>> " " == Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
> > 
> >      > From my reading of the patch, it supersedes the old patch, and
> >      > is only
> >      > necessary on the client. Is also does not compile :-)
> > 
> > Yeah, I admit I didn't test it out...
> > 
> >      > Here's an updated patch which does compile.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> >      > I am still running tests, but so far it looks good (that is all
> >      > locks are freed when a process with locks running on a NFS
> >      > client is killed).
> > 
> > Good...
> 
> I've ran test overnight on four boxen, and no locks were lost.
> I guess you can send this patch to Marcello now.
> 
> I've tested with the enclosed program.
> 
>  
> > There are still 2 other issues with the generic POSIX locking code.
> > Both issues have to do with CLONE_VM and have been raised on
> > linux-kernel & linux-fsdevel. Unfortunately they met with no response,
> > so I'm unable to pursue...
> 
> Can we help? Pointers?
> 
> Phil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
> help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
> YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Re: [NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

[Philippe Troin]

"Chris Croswhite" <csc@cadence.com> writes:

> Philippe,
> 
> What patches are you refering to?

The one in <87llpms8yr.fsf@ceramic.fifi.org> named
linux-2.4.23-nfs-lock-race-2.patch 

Here a link to MARC, since the sourceforge mailing list web page
sucks:

  http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-nfs&m=107095817723325&w=2

Phil.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Philippe Troin [mailto:phil@fifi.org]
> Sent:	Tue 09-Dec-03 10:46
> To:	Trond Myklebust
> Cc:	Kenny Simpson; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject:	[NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination
> Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> writes:
> 
> > >>>>> " " == Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
> > 
> >      > From my reading of the patch, it supersedes the old patch, and
> >      > is only
> >      > necessary on the client. Is also does not compile :-)
> > 
> > Yeah, I admit I didn't test it out...
> > 
> >      > Here's an updated patch which does compile.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> >      > I am still running tests, but so far it looks good (that is all
> >      > locks are freed when a process with locks running on a NFS
> >      > client is killed).
> > 
> > Good...
> 
> I've ran test overnight on four boxen, and no locks were lost.
> I guess you can send this patch to Marcello now.
> 
> I've tested with the enclosed program.
> 
>  
> > There are still 2 other issues with the generic POSIX locking code.
> > Both issues have to do with CLONE_VM and have been raised on
> > linux-kernel & linux-fsdevel. Unfortunately they met with no response,
> > so I'm unable to pursue...
> 
> Can we help? Pointers?
> 
> Phil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
> help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
> YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

RE: Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

[Chris Croswhite]

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From:	Philippe Troin [mailto:phil@fifi.org]
Sent:	Tue 09-Dec-03 11:26
To:	Chris Croswhite
Cc:	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject:	Re: [NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal =
process termination
"Chris Croswhite" <csc@cadence.com> writes:

> Philippe,
>=20
> What patches are you refering to?

The one in <87llpms8yr.fsf@ceramic.fifi.org> named
linux-2.4.23-nfs-lock-race-2.patch=20

Here a link to MARC, since the sourceforge mailing list web page
sucks:

  http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=3Dlinux-nfs&m=3D107095817723325&w=3D2

Phil.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Philippe Troin [mailto:phil@fifi.org]
> Sent:	Tue 09-Dec-03 10:46
> To:	Trond Myklebust
> Cc:	Kenny Simpson; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; =
nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject:	[NFS] Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal =
process termination
> Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> writes:
>=20
> > >>>>> " " =3D=3D Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org> writes:
> >=20
> >      > From my reading of the patch, it supersedes the old patch, =
and
> >      > is only
> >      > necessary on the client. Is also does not compile :-)
> >=20
> > Yeah, I admit I didn't test it out...
> >=20
> >      > Here's an updated patch which does compile.
> >=20
> > Thanks.
> >=20
> >      > I am still running tests, but so far it looks good (that is =
all
> >      > locks are freed when a process with locks running on a NFS
> >      > client is killed).
> >=20
> > Good...
>=20
> I've ran test overnight on four boxen, and no locks were lost.
> I guess you can send this patch to Marcello now.
>=20
> I've tested with the enclosed program.
>=20
> =20
> > There are still 2 other issues with the generic POSIX locking code.
> > Both issues have to do with CLONE_VM and have been raised on
> > linux-kernel & linux-fsdevel. Unfortunately they met with no =
response,
> > so I'm unable to pursue...
>=20
> Can we help? Pointers?
>=20
> Phil.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
> help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
> YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs





-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

Re: Re: [NFS client] NFS locks not released on abnormal process termination

[YAMAMOTO Takashi]

hi,

> > i think it's problematic because you can't assume the lock was
> > granted on the server and the signaled process might not exit
> > immediately.
> 
> The point is that it is *worse* to assume the lock was not granted,
> since then it will never get cleared on the server.

yes.

> The RPC layer blocks all signals except SIGKILL, so the signalled
> process has no choice but to exit immediately if something gets
> through.

we're talking about interruptible mounts, aren't we?

are you referring to rpc_clnt_sigmask() ?
i think it isn't safe to assume sa_handler isn't changed during
blocking for lock.  consider CLONE_SIGHAND, for example.

YAMAMOTO Takashi



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering
advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms.
Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs