From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: "William A. (Andy) Adamson" <androsadamson@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: reboot recovery
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:11:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100309161127.GB23013@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <89c397151003090717v7b744eb7i8c1c941f169e45e2@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:17:04AM -0500, William A. (Andy) Adamson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:10 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:55:52AM -0500, William A. (Andy) Adamson wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:53 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:46:04AM -0500, Andy Adamson wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> RFC 5661 in section 18.51.3
> >> >>
> >> >> Whenever a client establishes a new client ID and before it does the
> >> >> first non-reclaim operation that obtains a lock, it MUST send a
> >> >> RECLAIM_COMPLETE with rca_one_fs set to FALSE, even if there are no
> >> >> locks to reclaim. If non-reclaim locking operations are done before
> >> >> the RECLAIM_COMPLETE, an NFS4ERR_GRACE error will be returned.
> >> >>
> >> >> So there will never be a 'first OPEN' (except for an OPEN reclaim)
> >> >> without a RECLAIM_COMPLETE.
> >> >
> >> > There will be in the case of an entirely new client, or a client that
> >> > missed the grace period completely.
> >>
> >> No, the MUST above applies to both a new client/client that missed the
> >> grace period completely. In both cases the client is establishing a
> >> new client ID.
> >
> > Oog, sorry, obviously I can't read--I see what you mean now.
> >
> > I haven't seen any client send a RECLAIM_COMPLETE or any server demand
> > one yet, so do we all have this wrong?
>
> The latest Linux client does send a RECLAIM_COMPLETE after each
> EXCHANGE_ID. This change was part of the 'A' tasks for NFSv4.1.
Got it, corrected.
In that case I think as a matter of priorities I should implement
RECLAIM_COMPLETE before fixing the userland interface, etc., rather than
after. I'll take a look....
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-09 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-09 1:46 reboot recovery J. Bruce Fields
2010-03-09 14:46 ` Andy Adamson
2010-03-09 14:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-03-09 14:55 ` William A. (Andy) Adamson
2010-03-09 15:10 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-03-09 15:17 ` William A. (Andy) Adamson
2010-03-09 16:11 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2010-03-09 17:39 ` Chuck Lever
2010-03-09 20:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-03-09 21:07 ` Chuck Lever
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100309161127.GB23013@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=androsadamson@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox