linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Bruce,

Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit
173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific
stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit
f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename
queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree.

Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc net/sunrpc/cache.c
index db7720e,d19c075..0000000
--- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
@@@ -884,7 -908,19 +884,7 @@@ static int cache_release(struct inode *
  
  
  
- static void queue_loose(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
 -static const struct file_operations cache_file_operations = {
 -	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
 -	.llseek		= no_llseek,
 -	.read		= cache_read,
 -	.write		= cache_write,
 -	.poll		= cache_poll,
 -	.ioctl		= cache_ioctl, /* for FIONREAD */
 -	.open		= cache_open,
 -	.release	= cache_release,
 -};
 -
 -
+ static void cache_dequeue(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
  {
  	struct cache_queue *cq;
  	spin_lock(&queue_lock);

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:58:51AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
> net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit
> 173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific
> stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit
> f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename
> queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree.

OK, thanks.

Looks like there may be some less trivial conflicts now, though.  Trond,
maybe you could rebase the cache stuff against my latest for-2.6.32?

--b.

> 
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> 
> diff --cc net/sunrpc/cache.c
> index db7720e,d19c075..0000000
> --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> @@@ -884,7 -908,19 +884,7 @@@ static int cache_release(struct inode *
>   
>   
>   
> - static void queue_loose(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
>  -static const struct file_operations cache_file_operations = {
>  -	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
>  -	.llseek		= no_llseek,
>  -	.read		= cache_read,
>  -	.write		= cache_write,
>  -	.poll		= cache_poll,
>  -	.ioctl		= cache_ioctl, /* for FIONREAD */
>  -	.open		= cache_open,
>  -	.release	= cache_release,
>  -};
>  -
>  -
> + static void cache_dequeue(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
>   {
>   	struct cache_queue *cq;
>   	spin_lock(&queue_lock);

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Trond Myklebust]

On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:05 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:58:51AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Bruce,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
> > net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit
> > 173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific
> > stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit
> > f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename
> > queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree.
> 
> OK, thanks.
> 
> Looks like there may be some less trivial conflicts now, though.  Trond,
> maybe you could rebase the cache stuff against my latest for-2.6.32?

I've merged your for-2.6.32 into a dedicated sunrpc_cache-for_next topic
branch and pushed that out as part of the NFS client linux-next.

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer

NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com
www.netapp.com

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 02:08:52PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:05 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:58:51AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Bruce,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
> > > net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit
> > > 173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific
> > > stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit
> > > f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename
> > > queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree.
> > 
> > OK, thanks.
> > 
> > Looks like there may be some less trivial conflicts now, though.  Trond,
> > maybe you could rebase the cache stuff against my latest for-2.6.32?
> 
> I've merged your for-2.6.32 into a dedicated sunrpc_cache-for_next topic
> branch and pushed that out as part of the NFS client linux-next.

Yup, that works for me.  Thanks.

Note I'm no longer messing with the for-2.6.x branches (like
for-2.6.32)--so those will only ever fast-forward.

--b.

linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

Hi,

Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
include/linux/nfs4.h between commit d67ae825a59d ("pnfs/flexfiles: Add
the FlexFile Layout Driver") from the nfs tree and commit 6cae0a4648c0
("nfs: add LAYOUT_TYPE_MAX enum value") from the nfsd tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc include/linux/nfs4.h
index de7c91ca427e,bc10d687f2ce..000000000000
--- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
+++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
@@@ -516,7 -517,7 +517,8 @@@ enum pnfs_layouttype 
  	LAYOUT_NFSV4_1_FILES  = 1,
  	LAYOUT_OSD2_OBJECTS = 2,
  	LAYOUT_BLOCK_VOLUME = 3,
 +	LAYOUT_FLEX_FILES = 4,
+ 	LAYOUT_TYPE_MAX
  };
  
  /* used for both layout return and recall */

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:55:49AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
> include/linux/nfs4.h between commit d67ae825a59d ("pnfs/flexfiles: Add
> the FlexFile Layout Driver") from the nfs tree and commit 6cae0a4648c0
> ("nfs: add LAYOUT_TYPE_MAX enum value") from the nfsd tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).

Thanks!--b.

> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> 
> diff --cc include/linux/nfs4.h
> index de7c91ca427e,bc10d687f2ce..000000000000
> --- a/include/linux/nfs4.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nfs4.h
> @@@ -516,7 -517,7 +517,8 @@@ enum pnfs_layouttype 
>   	LAYOUT_NFSV4_1_FILES  = 1,
>   	LAYOUT_OSD2_OBJECTS = 2,
>   	LAYOUT_BLOCK_VOLUME = 3,
>  +	LAYOUT_FLEX_FILES = 4,
> + 	LAYOUT_TYPE_MAX
>   };
>   
>   /* used for both layout return and recall */

linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1601 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:

  include/trace/events/sunrpc.h

between commit:

  b4776a341ec0 ("SUNRPC: Tracepoints should display tk_pid and cl_clid as a fixed-size field")

from the nfs tree and commit:

  35940a58f9f1 ("SUNRPC: Capture value of xdr_buf::page_base")

from the nfsd tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
index dc922e664820,9ea59959a2fe..000000000000
--- a/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
@@@ -80,11 -80,12 +82,14 @@@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(rpc_xdr_buf_class
  		__entry->msg_len = xdr->len;
  	),
  
 -	TP_printk("task:%u@%u head=[%p,%zu] page=%u(%u) tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",
 +	TP_printk(SUNRPC_TRACE_TASK_SPECIFIER
 +		  " head=[%p,%zu] page=%u tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",
++		  " head=[%p,%zu] page=%u(%u) tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",
  		__entry->task_id, __entry->client_id,
- 		__entry->head_base, __entry->head_len, __entry->page_len,
- 		__entry->tail_base, __entry->tail_len, __entry->msg_len
+ 		__entry->head_base, __entry->head_len,
+ 		__entry->page_len, __entry->page_base,
+ 		__entry->tail_base, __entry->tail_len,
+ 		__entry->msg_len
  	)
  );
  

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1811 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 10:59:51 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   b4776a341ec0 ("SUNRPC: Tracepoints should display tk_pid and cl_clid as a fixed-size field")
> 
> from the nfs tree and commit:
> 
>   35940a58f9f1 ("SUNRPC: Capture value of xdr_buf::page_base")
> 
> from the nfsd tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
> 
> diff --cc include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
> index dc922e664820,9ea59959a2fe..000000000000
> --- a/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
> @@@ -80,11 -80,12 +82,14 @@@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(rpc_xdr_buf_class
>   		__entry->msg_len = xdr->len;
>   	),
>   
>  -	TP_printk("task:%u@%u head=[%p,%zu] page=%u(%u) tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",
>  +	TP_printk(SUNRPC_TRACE_TASK_SPECIFIER
>  +		  " head=[%p,%zu] page=%u tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",

Oops, I have taken the above line out.

> ++		  " head=[%p,%zu] page=%u(%u) tail=[%p,%zu] len=%u",
>   		__entry->task_id, __entry->client_id,
> - 		__entry->head_base, __entry->head_len, __entry->page_len,
> - 		__entry->tail_base, __entry->tail_len, __entry->msg_len
> + 		__entry->head_base, __entry->head_len,
> + 		__entry->page_len, __entry->page_base,
> + 		__entry->tail_base, __entry->tail_len,
> + 		__entry->msg_len
>   	)
>   );

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2935 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:

  fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c

between commit:

  11a149e09d58 ("sunrpc: make rpc_restart_call() and rpc_restart_call_prepare() void return")

from the nfs tree and commits:

  6c1cefb84b3d ("nfsd: lift NFSv4.0 handling out of nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()")
  f049911b5b98 ("nfsd: only check RPC_SIGNALLED() when restarting rpc_task")

from the nfsd tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
index 654bee80acef,ec6539cec0fe..000000000000
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
@@@ -1381,41 -1384,42 +1384,43 @@@ static bool nfsd4_cb_sequence_done(stru
  		fallthrough;
  	case -NFS4ERR_BADSESSION:
  		nfsd4_mark_cb_fault(cb->cb_clp);
- 		ret = false;
- 		goto need_restart;
+ 		goto requeue;
  	case -NFS4ERR_DELAY:
  		cb->cb_seq_status = 1;
 -		if (RPC_SIGNALLED(task) || !rpc_restart_call(task))
 +		rpc_restart_call(task);
++		if (RPC_SIGNALLED(task))
+ 			goto requeue;
  		rpc_delay(task, 2 * HZ);
  		return false;
- 	case -NFS4ERR_BADSLOT:
- 		goto retry_nowait;
  	case -NFS4ERR_SEQ_MISORDERED:
- 		if (session->se_cb_seq_nr[cb->cb_held_slot] != 1) {
- 			session->se_cb_seq_nr[cb->cb_held_slot] = 1;
- 			goto retry_nowait;
- 		}
- 		break;
+ 	case -NFS4ERR_BADSLOT:
+ 		/*
+ 		 * A SEQ_MISORDERED or BADSLOT error means that the client and
+ 		 * server are out of sync as to the backchannel parameters. Mark
+ 		 * the backchannel faulty and restart the RPC, but leak the slot
+ 		 * so that it's no longer used.
+ 		 */
+ 		nfsd4_mark_cb_fault(cb->cb_clp);
+ 		cb->cb_held_slot = -1;
+ 		goto retry_nowait;
  	default:
  		nfsd4_mark_cb_fault(cb->cb_clp);
  	}
  	trace_nfsd_cb_free_slot(task, cb);
  	nfsd41_cb_release_slot(cb);
- 
- 	if (RPC_SIGNALLED(task))
- 		goto need_restart;
- out:
  	return ret;
  retry_nowait:
- 	rpc_restart_call_prepare(task);
- 	ret = false;
- 	goto out;
- need_restart:
- 	if (!test_bit(NFSD4_CLIENT_CB_KILL, &clp->cl_flags)) {
- 		trace_nfsd_cb_restart(clp, cb);
- 		task->tk_status = 0;
- 		cb->cb_need_restart = true;
+ 	/*
+ 	 * RPC_SIGNALLED() means that the rpc_client is being torn down and
+ 	 * (possibly) recreated. Requeue the call in that case.
+ 	 */
+ 	if (!RPC_SIGNALLED(task)) {
 -		if (rpc_restart_call_prepare(task))
 -			return false;
++		rpc_restart_call_prepare(task);
++		return false;
  	}
+ requeue:
+ 	nfsd41_cb_release_slot(cb);
+ 	nfsd4_requeue_cb(task, cb);
  	return false;
  }
  

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Chuck Lever]

On 3/20/25 6:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   11a149e09d58 ("sunrpc: make rpc_restart_call() and rpc_restart_call_prepare() void return")
> 
> from the nfs tree and commits:
> 
>   6c1cefb84b3d ("nfsd: lift NFSv4.0 handling out of nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()")
>   f049911b5b98 ("nfsd: only check RPC_SIGNALLED() when restarting rpc_task")
> 
> from the nfsd tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Since 11a149e09d58 is only clean up, I prefer that it be dropped from
the nfs tree until v6.16. Trond, if you don't want to do that, then I
can include a merge conflict notice in my pull request for v6.15.


-- 
Chuck Lever

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Trond Myklebust]

On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 09:32 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On 3/20/25 6:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   11a149e09d58 ("sunrpc: make rpc_restart_call() and
> > rpc_restart_call_prepare() void return")
> > 
> > from the nfs tree and commits:
> > 
> >   6c1cefb84b3d ("nfsd: lift NFSv4.0 handling out of
> > nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()")
> >   f049911b5b98 ("nfsd: only check RPC_SIGNALLED() when restarting
> > rpc_task")
> > 
> > from the nfsd tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your
> > tree
> > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
> > cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
> > particularly
> > complex conflicts.
> 
> Since 11a149e09d58 is only clean up, I prefer that it be dropped from
> the nfs tree until v6.16. Trond, if you don't want to do that, then I
> can include a merge conflict notice in my pull request for v6.15.
> 
> 

Removed and rebased.

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

[Chuck Lever]

On 3/21/25 9:37 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 09:32 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> On 3/20/25 6:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>   fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>   11a149e09d58 ("sunrpc: make rpc_restart_call() and
>>> rpc_restart_call_prepare() void return")
>>>
>>> from the nfs tree and commits:
>>>
>>>   6c1cefb84b3d ("nfsd: lift NFSv4.0 handling out of
>>> nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()")
>>>   f049911b5b98 ("nfsd: only check RPC_SIGNALLED() when restarting
>>> rpc_task")
>>>
>>> from the nfsd tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your
>>> tree
>>> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
>>> cooperating
>>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
>>> particularly
>>> complex conflicts.
>>
>> Since 11a149e09d58 is only clean up, I prefer that it be dropped from
>> the nfs tree until v6.16. Trond, if you don't want to do that, then I
>> can include a merge conflict notice in my pull request for v6.15.
>>
>>
> 
> Removed and rebased.
> 

Thanks Trond and Stephen!


-- 
Chuck Lever