Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]:34769 "EHLO mail-qk0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751676AbcILUa2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:30:28 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id h8so67057596qka.1 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 13:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1473712223.8504.2.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] nfs: track whether server sets MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK flag From: Jeff Layton To: Anna Schumaker , trond.myklebust@primarydata.com Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:30:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <68634996-8fba-5bcd-27e3-5d6ab5f881ba@Netapp.com> References: <1473446870-1831-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <1473446870-1831-6-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <68634996-8fba-5bcd-27e3-5d6ab5f881ba@Netapp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2016-09-12 at 16:19 -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On 09/09/2016 02:47 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > If it does, then always have the client sleep for the max time before > > repolling for the lock. If it doesn't then we can skip all of the > > waitqueue handling as well. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton > > --- > >  fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h  | 1 + > >  fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 2 ++ > >  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h b/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h > > index 9bf64eacba5b..91e4f135a5f2 100644 > > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h > > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h > > @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ enum { > > > > > >   NFS_STATE_RECLAIM_NOGRACE, /* OPEN stateid needs to recover state */ > > > > > >   NFS_STATE_POSIX_LOCKS, /* Posix locks are supported */ > > > > > >   NFS_STATE_RECOVERY_FAILED, /* OPEN stateid state recovery failed */ > > > > > > + NFS_STATE_MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK, /* server may CB_NOTIFY_LOCK */ > > Looks like the reason I don't have this flag is because it's added as part of the server patches.  I'll coordinate with the nfsd merge to make sure everything is added in the right order! > > Thanks, > Anna Oh! Yes, that would explain it -- sorry... Would it help at all to break out the addition of that field into a separate patch? Just wondering what the right approach is for future reference. Thanks, Jeff > > > >  }; > >   > >  struct nfs4_state { > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c > > index 90e8ded0ef82..627a9185822f 100644 > > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c > > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c > > @@ -2537,6 +2537,8 @@ static int _nfs4_open_and_get_state(struct nfs4_opendata *opendata, > > > >   goto out; > > > >   if (server->caps & NFS_CAP_POSIX_LOCK) > > > >   set_bit(NFS_STATE_POSIX_LOCKS, &state->flags); > > > > + if (opendata->o_res.rflags & NFS4_OPEN_RESULT_MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK) > > > > + set_bit(NFS_STATE_MAY_NOTIFY_LOCK, &state->flags); > >   > > > >   dentry = opendata->dentry; > > > >   if (d_really_is_negative(dentry)) { > > > > -- > 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 -- Jeff Layton