Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:42495 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932489AbcHKQ7E (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:59:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 18:59:02 +0200 From: hch To: Jeff Layton Cc: hch , Trond Myklebust , List Linux NFS Mailing , Thomas Haynes , Fields Bruce James Subject: Re: CB_LAYOUTRECALL "deadlock" with in-kernel flexfiles server and XFS Message-ID: <20160811165902.GA25717@lst.de> References: <1470929036.30238.14.camel@redhat.com> <1470931603.30238.25.camel@redhat.com> <66A7F612-4704-43CB-AE93-6C1A8A52D6DA@primarydata.com> <20160811162521.GA24116@lst.de> <1470933227.30238.35.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1470933227.30238.35.camel@redhat.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:33:47PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Thu, 2016-08-11 at 18:25 +0200, hch wrote: > > Yeah, for file-like layouts there should be a flag in > > struct nfsd4_layout_ops to disable recalls. > > I don't think disabling recalls would be enough, would it? XFS still > wants to break_layout and won't proceed until the layout list is empty, > AFAICT. We need some way to indicate to the lower filesystem not to > call break_layout in this case. XFS only cares about block-like layours where the client has direct access to the file blocks. I'd need to look how to propagate the flag into break_layout, but in principle we don't need to do any recalls on truncate every for file and flexfile layouts. > > -- > Jeff Layton ---end quoted text---