On Sun, Aug 20 2017, James Simmons wrote: >> This series is a revised version of two patches I sent >> previously (one of which was sadly broken). >> That patch has been broken into multiple parts for easy >> review. The other is included unchanged as the last of >> this series. >> >> I was drawn to look at this code due to the tests on >> DCACHE_DISCONNECTED which are often wrong, and it turns out >> they are used wrongly in lustre too. Fixing one led to some >> clean-up. Fixing the other is straight forward. >> >> A particular change here from the previous posting is >> the first patch which tests for DCACHE_PAR_LOOKUP in ll_dcompare(). >> Without this patch, two threads can be looking up the same >> name in a given directory in parallel. This parallelism lead >> to my concerns about needing improved locking in ll_splice_alias(). >> Instead of improving the locking, I now avoid the need for it >> by fixing ll_dcompare. >> >> This code passes basic "smoke tests". >> >> Note that the cast to "struct dentry *" in the first patch is because >> we have a "const struct dentry *" but d_in_lookup() requires a >> pointer to a non-const structure. I'll send a separate patch to >> change d_in_lookup(). > > To let you know this patch has been under going testing and we have a > ticket open to track the progess: > > https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-9868 > > Your patch did reveal that a piece of a fix landed earlier is missing :-( > So currently the client can oops. I will send the fix shortly but this > work will have to rebased after. As soon as we can get some cycles we will > figure out what is going on. Thanks for helping out.
Hi, what happened about this? I had a look around the ticket and couldn't find anything about an oops. If there is still a problem I'd be very happy to help work out what it is - but I don't know where to look. Thanks, NeilBrown
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
