From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFS: Unlink should revoke all outstanding leases on file Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 13:38:19 -0400 Message-ID: <20100514133819.5e383485@tlielax.poochiereds.net> References: <4BED195F.3070504@cn.fujitsu.com> <20100514055844.109d2fdc@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <1273857471.4732.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mi Jinlong , NFSv3 list , linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, adobriyan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org, jamie-yetKDKU6eevNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1273857471.4732.7.camel-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 14 May 2010 13:17:51 -0400 Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 05:58 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Fri, 14 May 2010 17:35:27 +0800 > > Mi Jinlong wrote: > > > > > After client get one file's READ delegation through NFSv4, > > > server delete this file but don't reclaim the delegation. > > > > > > This patch add break_lease at may_delete, which can reclaim delegations. > > > > > > --- > > > fs/namei.c | 2 +- > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c > > > index 16df727..17bafc1 100644 > > > --- a/fs/namei.c > > > +++ b/fs/namei.c > > > @@ -1338,7 +1338,7 @@ static int may_delete(struct inode *dir,struct dentry *victim,int isdir) > > > return -ENOENT; > > > if (victim->d_flags & DCACHE_NFSFS_RENAMED) > > > return -EBUSY; > > > - return 0; > > > + return break_lease(victim->d_inode, FMODE_WRITE); > > > } > > > > > > /* Check whether we can create an object with dentry child in directory > > > > This doesn't look right to me. > > > > The fcntl(2) manpage basically says that leases should be broken if the > > file is opened for read or write, or is truncated. unlinks don't seem > > to fall into either category... > > > > Breaking the lease in this case is certainly a requirement for NFSv4 > delegations. I've no idea what the CIFS oplock requirements are... > Heh, probably "undefined". Windows generally doesn't allow you to delete open files at all. I don't think samba will really care too much either way. I suppose it could hurt performance in situations where you had a file that was hardlinked and deleted a hardlink that was "unrelated" to the dentry being held open...but that's pretty clearly a corner case at best. At the risk of being lazy and not checking for myself...what in the NFSv4 spec mandates this? -- Jeff Layton -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html