[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0609041652520.17279@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 16:55:11 +0200 (MEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Russell Cattelan <cattelan@...hat.com>,
David Teigland <teigland@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/16] GFS2: File and inode operations
>> Is not there a better way to do this? Note that there is also a "nfsd4" process
>> running. Do you really want to do a 'costly'
>>
>> strcmp(current->comm, "nfsd") != 0 && strcmp(current->comm, "nfsd4") != 0
>>
>> every time someone does a readdir? What if I run a userspace nfs daemon?
>> What if that userspace daemon is called differently?
>>
>> jengelh@...ux01:7 08:28:14 ~ > ps -e | grep nfs
>> 5580 ? 00:00:08 rpc.nfsd
>> jengelh@...ux01:7 08:28:30 ~ > rpm -qf /usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd
>> nfs-server-2.2beta51-209.2 (a userspace nfsd)
>
>Ah, now this is a very tricky one to solve. Its on my todo list to look
>at this area again. You are right that the test is bogus in that it
>should only respond to the in kernel NFS server and the reason for its
In that case, you could use the fact that ... (I'll express it in C code):
is_kernel_task = !current->mm;
>existence is due to locking issues with the way that NFS calls through
>the VFS layer.
Jan Engelhardt
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists