From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: close potential race between delegation break and laundromat
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 15:26:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140711192632.GI9775@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140707160017.6900c4b4@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 04:00:17PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 15:31:08 -0400
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:14:50PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > Sigh...after staring at this patch all day, I think I now see a
> > > potential problem with the fault injection piece.
> > >
> > > In the "recall" case, we may find a delegation on the cl_delegations
> > > list that has already been recalled. If that's the case, then we
> > > probably should just skip it.
> > >
> > > I'll fix this patch, retest and resend. Sorry for the noise...
> >
> > OK, so sounds like the fix isn't a big deal, but it also sounds like the
> > fault injection code has come up as needing special attention a few
> > times during this work now.
> >
> > Has anyone actually ended up using that code? Anna?
> >
> > In retrospect I wonder if it's worth the trouble. It's very
> > special-purpose stuff and if nobody's using it then maybe we could just
> > remove it....
> >
> > --b.
>
> I certainly wouldn't object. Having printks that are triggered by
> reading from a debugfs file is just weird, and there are quite a few
> races and bugs in this code.
>
> I have patches that are basically a rewrite of it, but I left the UI
> the same. It was necessary in order to allow for the changes to the
> locking around this code, but that does mean that it's a larger chunk
> of code than it used to be.
>
> That said, we've shipped this code in several releases now so removing
> it without any warning might not be a good idea. What may be best is to
> mark it for deprecation if we don't want to keep it, and take my patches
> that overhaul it in the interim. Then, remove it altogether in 2-3
> releases.
Well, if you've already done the work, fine.
If it becomes a problem then I wouldn't rule out removing it summarily.
It's purely for client testing, and if neither Anna nor any of us knows
anyone using it then chances are nobody would notice.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-11 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-07 19:03 [PATCH] nfsd: close potential race between delegation break and laundromat Jeff Layton
2014-07-07 19:14 ` Jeff Layton
2014-07-07 19:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-07-07 20:00 ` Jeff Layton
2014-07-11 19:26 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2014-07-07 20:04 ` Anna Schumaker
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=20140711192632.GI9775@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=jeff.layton@primarydata.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