Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:48997 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753185AbbLGNJd (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 08:09:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:09:32 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jeff Layton Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "J. Bruce Fields" , Kinglong Mee , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] nfsd: serialize layout stateid morphing operations Message-ID: <20151207130932.GB30843@lst.de> References: <20151130193313.5bb10791@synchrony.poochiereds.net> <20151201115600.GA1557@lst.de> <20151201174800.407e2c40@synchrony.poochiereds.net> <20151202072504.GA15839@lst.de> <20151203220850.GC19518@fieldses.org> <20151204083803.GA2440@lst.de> <20151204155110.64a352dd@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20151205120222.GA27009@lst.de> <20151205072409.46d66109@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20151206080954.1fe7e5c9@tlielax.poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20151206080954.1fe7e5c9@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 08:09:54AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > Either way...in the near term we should probably take the patch that I > originally proposed, just to ensure that no one hits the bugs that > Kinglong hit. That does still leave some gaps in the seqid handling, > but those are preferable to the warning and deadlock. > > Bruce, does that sound reasonable? I can send that patch in a separate > email if you'd prefer. What is the patch you proposed? As far as I can tell the short term action would require two patches: - treat 0 like NFS4ERR_DELAY (not directly related to your patch) - send the old layout stateid with a recall, and only increment it in nfsd4_cb_layout_release when we actually change the layout state