From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nils Goroll Subject: Re: nfs4 locks: What happens when a lease can't get renewed? Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:08:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4C19F438.6060800@schokola.de> References: <4C12A779.6010005@schokola.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from smtp.mcs.de ([212.1.60.21]:56809 "EHLO smtp.mcs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751065Ab0FQKI7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:08:59 -0400 Received: from p5dd5112e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.213.17.46]:39440 helo=[192.168.77.36]) by smtp.mcs.de with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OPC1p-0005Ze-CQ for linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:08:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4C12A779.6010005-fLMQ21Bj+IYb1SvskN2V4Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, I am reposting my question because I feel it is quite substantial. IMHO, some mechanism to ensure data integrity is needed for "lost locks". On 06/11/10 11:15 PM, Nils Goroll wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder what happens if a lock on nfs4 has been acquired by an application (for > instance, using fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, F_WRLCK)) and the lock can't be RENEWed, for > instance due to a network outage preventing communication between the client and > the server. > > I would have thought that some notification mechanism was useful, for instance > my means of delivery of a signal as set using F_SETOWN / F_SETSIG for leases. > > I would highly appreciate helpful pointers should this question have already > been discussed of if there exists any other helpful documentation on it. > > Thank you, > > Nils > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html