From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [NFS] [PATCH 10/10] gfs2: nfs lock support for gfs2 Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:52:24 -0500 Message-ID: <1165517544.2903.4.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> References: <20061207152359.GB13613@fieldses.org> <20061207162110.GA16858@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Marc Eshel , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, David Teigland , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: To: "J. Bruce Fields" In-Reply-To: <20061207162110.GA16858@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 11:21 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 07:43:48AM -0800, Marc Eshel wrote: > > nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net wrote on 12/07/2006 07:23:59 AM: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 10:47:46PM -0800, Marc Eshel wrote: > > > > if (!rv) { /* got fs lock */ > > > > rv = posix_lock_file(file, fl); > > > > if (rv) { /* did not get posix lock */ > > > > > > If we never request the local lock until after we've gotten the lock > > > from GFS, then this should never happen. So I think this could just be > > > a BUG_ON(rv)--except that would mean a failure in the lock manager could > > > oops the kernel, so maybe it'd be better just to printk. > > > > It can happen if you can not allocate memory. > > OK, you're right. > > Hm, the NFS client just seems to print out a warning at this point, > though. Feel free to suggest alternatives. If you cannot even allocate the memory necessary to add a struct file_lock, then how can you expect to find enough resources to be able to marshall up an RPC call? Trond