Re: 2.6.29, holidays

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Benny Halevy <bhalevy@panasas.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.29, holidays
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:59:04 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090202225904.GF13389@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090202225805.GE13389@fieldses.org>

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 05:58:05PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 08:01:40PM +0200, Benny Halevy wrote:
> > On Dec. 22, 2008, 19:11 +0200, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> > > I'm leaving town till the new year.  It's likely 2.6.28 will be released
> > > (and the 2.6.29 merge window open) on Christmas, though the merge window
> > > will be extended to take into account the holidays:
> > > 
> > > 	http://lwn.net/Articles/312154/
> > > 
> > > I'll be online at least part of the time, and review outstanding patches
> > > from Chuck and Benny (and hopefully Steved's export patches).  If you
> > > have other server stuff pending for 2.6.29, please remind me.
> > 
> > Hi Bruce,
> > 
> > First, enjoy your vacation!
> > Regarding 2.6.29, how about the following patch from Alexandros?
> > http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=bhalevy/linux-pnfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=35bbe2824b991e14877e7ceb6a36f91e2ea78226
> > I haven't sent it to you for 2.6.29 but I believe it's a good opportunity
> > to get it in.
> 
> Thanks, a little late,

(By which I mean, I'm a little late, obviously your mail wasn't.)

--b.

> but I've applied that....
> 
> I also spent some time trying to figure out what to do about the nfs4
> server's locking.  The scope of the state lock is a problem, mainly
> because (at least for me) it's hard to understand what it's protecting
> at this point.  And of course I worry about performance: I haven't tried
> to measure lock contention, but it can't be good that the same lock that
> can be held over disk access (read/write code isn't under it, but lots
> of lookups and creates are) is also used for simple hash-table lookups.
> 
> I got as far as looking at nfsd4_open() and despaired.
> 
> A global spinlock or two for the various hash tables, together with a
> semaphore for each stateowner, to serialize the stateid replay stuff,
> might do the job.
> 
> Anyway, I committed some very minor cleanup of the open code--you can
> see it at for-2.6.30, if anyone's interested, but didn't get any
> further.
> 
> --b.
> _______________________________________________
> NFSv4 mailing list
> NFSv4@linux-nfs.org
> http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4