From: Fabio Olive Leite Subject: Re: [PATCH] Stale NFS negative dentries caused by u32 jiffy wrap Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:24:59 -0300 Message-ID: <20070426032459.GN10449@sleipnir.redhat.com> References: <20070424162645.GD10449@sleipnir.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hgubx-0001zG-9W for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:25:39 -0700 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1Hguby-0002eO-Ll for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:25:40 -0700 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l3Q3PWxi029461 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:25:32 -0400 Received: from pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (pobox-2.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l3Q3PWlM028036 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:25:32 -0400 Received: from sleipnir.redhat.com (vpn-14-22.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.22]) by pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l3Q3PFRH029153 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:25:16 -0400 Received: from sleipnir.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sleipnir.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l3Q3P6K5003799 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:25:07 -0300 Received: (from fleite@localhost) by sleipnir.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l3Q3P5aV003794 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:25:05 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20070424162645.GD10449@sleipnir.redhat.com> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:26:45PM -0300, Fabio Olive Leite wrote: > = > This patch solves an issue found on 32bit architectures, where jiffies > wrap every 50 days. Since many NFS structures are very long lived and > the code uses jiffies everywhere for timestamp comparisons, there are > many places where old data can be considered newer than something > fresh from the server. This one deals with negative dentries, and I'd > like to have it discussed in the list for sanity checking. Please disregard this email and patch. With extra testing, I found out that time_after and friends are not suited at all to the type of long-lived timestamp comparisons that the NFS code does. I'll start a new thread for that. Regards, F=E1bio -- = ex sed lex awk yacc, e pluribus unix, amem ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs