Re: Make sm-notify faster if there are no servers to notify

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:30:03PM +0000, Phil Endecott wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:13:20AM +0000, Phil Endecott wrote:
>>> Dear Experts,
>>>
>>> sm-notify was taking a long time while my laptop booted.  This was 
>>> odd because I use NFS only rarely - via autofs - on that machine, and 
>>> sm-notify actually has no-one to notify most of the time.  So I have 
>>> patched it as follows.  Is this a legitimate thing to do?
>>
>> It looks like your patch was committed to nfs-utils a couple weeks ago:
>> see c8d18e26d2a53d9036a32c2dafebccaf4ce1634d from
>>
>> 	git://linux-nfs.org/nfs-utils
>>
>> --b.
>
> How curious.  I guess someone saw my Debian bug report.  No mention of  
> it on this list as far as I can see though.
>
> I presume from this that it is considered a safe thing to do.

It looks right to me.  Hopefully somebody actually has tested this on a
client that holds locks when it reboots?

I remember this was one of the things Arjan mentioned having to disable
in his "5-second boot" talk at the Linux Plumbers Conference, so you're
not the only one to have noticed the problem....

--b.