[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140428072845.67f48d8e@notabene.brown>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 07:28:45 +1000
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To: mtk.manpages@...il.com
Cc: "Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" <metze@...ba.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ganesha NFS List <nfs-ganesha-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@...e.de>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-nfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Subject: Re: flock() and NFS [Was: Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private
locks to file-description locks]
On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 13:11:33 +0200 "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)"
<mtk.manpages@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:04 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 11:16:02 +0200 "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)"
> > <mtk.manpages@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> [Trimming some folk from CC, and adding various NFS people]
> >>
> >> On 04/27/2014 06:51 AM, NeilBrown wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > Note to Michael: The text
> >> > flock() does not lock files over NFS.
> >> > in flock(2) is no longer accurate. The reality is ... complex.
> >> > See nfs(5), and search for "local_lock".
> >>
> >> Ahhh -- I see:
> >> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=5eebde23223aeb0ad2d9e3be6590ff8bbfab0fc2
> >>
> >> Thanks for the heads up.
> >>
> >> Just in general, it would be great if the flock(2) and fcntl(2) man pages
> >> contained correct details for NFS, of course. So, for example, if there
> >> are any current gotchas for NFS and fcntl() byte-range locking, I'd like
> >> to add those to the fcntl(2) man page.
> >
> > The only peculiarities I can think of are:
> > - With NFS, locking or unlocking a region forces a flush of any cached data
> > for that file (or maybe for the region of the file). I'm not sure if this
> > is worth mentioning.
>
> I agree that it's probably not necessary to mention.
>
> > - With NFSv4 the client can lose a lock if it is out of contact with the
> > server for a period of time. When this happens, any IO to the file by a
> > process which "thinks" it holds a lock will fail until that process closes
> > and re-opens the file.
> > This behaviour is since 3.12. Prior to that the client might lose and
> > regain the lock without ever knowing thus potentially risking corruption
> > (but only if client and server lost contact for an extended period).
>
> Do you have a pointer for that commit to 3.12?
>
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ef1820f9be27b6ad158f433ab38002ab8131db4d
did most of the work while the subsequent commit
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f6de7a39c181dfb8a2c534661a53c73afb3081cd
changed some details, added some documentation, and inverted the default
behaviour.
NeilBrown
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists