From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Brown Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:40:16 +1000 Subject: [NFS] [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover In-Reply-To: References: <46156F3F.3070606@redhat.com> <4625204D.1030509@redhat.com> <17959.5245.635902.823441@notabene.brown> <462D79F0.4060800@redhat.com> <17965.39683.396108.623418@notabene.brown> <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> Message-ID: <17969.61232.323762.29003@notabene.brown> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Friday April 27, jlayton at poochiereds.net wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:00:13PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > > > So if you need that, then I think it really must be implemented by > > something a lot like > > echo -n /path/name > /proc/fs/nfs/nlm_unlock_filesystem > > > > This is something that we could possible teach "fuser -k" about - so > > it can effectively 'kill' that part of lockd that is accessing a given > > filesystem. It is useful to failover, but definitely useful beyond > > failover. > > Just a note that I posted a patch ~ a year ago that did precisely that. The > interface was a little bit different. I had userspace echoing in a dev_t > number, but it wouldn't be too hard to change it to use a pathname instead. > > Subject was: > > [PATCH] lockd: add procfs control to cue lockd to release all locks on a device > > ...if anyone is interested in having me resurrect it. > > -- Jeff http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/4/10/240 Looks like no-one ever replied. I probably didn't see it: things on linux-kernel that don't have 'nfs' or 'raid' (or a few related strings) in the subject have at best an even chance of me seeing them. I've just added 'lockd' to the list of important strings :-) I would rather a path name, and would rather it came through the 'nfsd' filesystem, but those are fairly trivial changes. nlm_traverse_files has changed a bit since then, but it should be easier to unlock based on filesystem with the current code (especially if we made the first arg a void*..). NeilBrown