Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:05:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:05:53 -0400 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.103]:38023 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:05:51 -0400 Subject: Why NFS server does not pass lock requests via VFS lock() op? To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.2a (Intl) 23 November 1999 Message-ID: From: Juan Gomez Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 16:11:19 -0700 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM694/03/M/IBM(Release 6.0|September 26, 2002) at 10/09/2002 17:11:19 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 705 Lines: 20 Could anyone remind me of why NFS kernel would not pass byte range lock requests to the underlying filsystem at the server side? I think another person at IBM (Brian?) submitted a patch for this but such patch never got included in the distribution. I think a patch to pass lock requests to the underlying filesystem does not affect single node NFS servers and it enables us to support clustered Linux-based NAS heads over distributed file systems. Juan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/