[OpenAFS-devel] Byte-range Locking in Linux CM (Implements Nathan Neulinger Proposal, Linux)

[Matt Benjamin]

Nathan,

I would agree.  I'll add a test case and work on it further.

Matt

Neulinger, Nathan wrote:

>Ok. I would be concerned about adding that patch as-is without further
>study as it reduces current functionality in the case of whole-file
>locks. That seems dangerous to me.
>
>-- Nathan
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@umr.edu
>University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-6679
>UMR Information Technology             Fax: (573) 341-4216
> 
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Matt Benjamin [mailto:matt@linuxbox.com] 
>>Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 3:44 PM
>>To: Neulinger, Nathan
>>Cc: openafs-devel@openafs.org
>>Subject: Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Byte-range Locking in Linux CM 
>>(Implements Nathan Neulinger Proposal, Linux)
>>
>>Nathan,
>>
>>At present, the client is not blocked, the behavior is as if 
>>the command 
>>was F_SETLK/64.
>>
>>Matt
>>
>>Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Neat trick using the posix_lock_file routine... 
>>>
>>>One concern - does it properly handle a lock that has requested
>>>blocking? i.e. SETLKW?
>>>
>>>I don't see that flag anywhere in the code... And 
>>>      
>>>
>>importantly - does it
>>    
>>
>>>actually block just that one process when that single lock 
>>>      
>>>
>>is requested?
>>    
>>
>>>That was one of the tricky spots that I got into when I 
>>>      
>>>
>>started fiddling
>>    
>>
>>>with the idea.
>>>
>>>-- Nathan
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>>Nathan Neulinger                       EMail:  nneul@umr.edu
>>>University of Missouri - Rolla         Phone: (573) 341-6679
>>>UMR Information Technology             Fax: (573) 341-4216
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org 
>>>>[mailto:openafs-devel-admin@openafs.org] On Behalf Of Matt Benjamin
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 3:19 PM
>>>>To: openafs-devel@openafs.org; openafs-bugs@openafs.org
>>>>Subject: [OpenAFS-devel] Byte-range Locking in Linux CM 
>>>>(Implements Nathan Neulinger Proposal, Linux)
>>>>
>>>>AFS Folk,
>>>>
>>>>Jhutz has reviewed--he at least agrees the code likely does what is 
>>>>intended, which is to implement Nathan Neulinger's locking proposal 
>>>>phase 1, where a CM implements local byte-range locking, 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>and shadows 
>>    
>>
>>>>such locks with whole-file locks on the AFS fileservers.  
>>>>Posting to dev 
>>>>and bugs, per Jeff.
>>>>
>>>>Change is confined to osi_vnodeops.c, except for a 
>>>>preprocessor define 
>>>>in afs_vnop_flock.c (which would presumably get switched on 
>>>>somehow or 
>>>>other).
>>>>
>>>>Patch is against 1.3.80.
>>>>
>>>>Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>OpenAFS-devel mailing list
>>>OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
>>>https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>