From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wendy Cheng Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:36:16 -0400 Subject: [NFS] [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 0/4 Revised] NLM - lock failover In-Reply-To: <20070427154259.GF32278@fieldses.org> References: <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> <17969.61232.323762.29003@notabene.brown> <20070427134248.GB25126@salusa.poochiereds.net> <20070427141710.GA11484@infradead.org> <20070427154259.GF32278@fieldses.org> Message-ID: <46321870.7000607@redhat.com> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 ... -- Wendy