From: Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
kernel@openvz.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] nfs4: handle async processing of F_SETLK with FL_SLEEP
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 21:28:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bb20d9ba-b529-c3ff-004d-75df74c0f9e6@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7666958f-6215-a8eb-3412-b613158406db@virtuozzo.com>
On 16.01.2022 15:44, Vasily Averin wrote:
> On 03.01.2022 22:53, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:24:43AM +0300, Vasily Averin wrote:
>>> nfsd and lockd use F_SETLK cmd with the FL_SLEEP flag set to request
>>> asynchronous processing of blocking locks.
>>>
>>> Currently nfs4 use locks_lock_inode_wait() function which is blocked
>>> for such requests. To handle them correctly FL_SLEEP flag should be
>>> temporarily reset before executing the locks_lock_inode_wait() function.
>>>
>>> Additionally block flag is forced to set, to translate blocking lock to
>>> remote nfs server, expecting it supports async processing of the blocking
>>> locks too.
>>
>> But this on its own isn't enough for the client to support asynchronous
>> blocking locks, right? Don't we also need the logic that calls knfsd's
>> lm_notify when it gets a CB_NOTIFY_LOCK from the server?
>
> No, I think this should be enough.
> We are here a nfs client,
> we can get F_SETLK with FL_SLEEP from nfsd only (i.e. in re-export case)
> we need to avoid blocking if lock is already taken,
> so we need to call locks_lock_inode_wait without FL_SLEEP,
> then we submit _sleeping_ request to NFS server (i.e. set )data->arg.block = 1)
> and waiting for reply from server.
>
> Here we rely that server will NOT block on such request too, so our reply wel not be blocked too.
Now I think this assumption is wrong.
We cannot guarantee that NFS server will process our sleeping request asynchronously.
yes, new version of knfsd will do it.
however there are a lot of other NFS servers, that can process this request synchronously and wait till locked fail will be unlocked.
All we can do here is just drop FL_SLEEP and handle incoming async request (F_SETLK with FL_SLEEP) like a regular non-blocking F_SETLK.
Thank you,
Vasily Averin
> Under "block" I mean that handler can sleep or process request for a very long time
> but it will NOT BE BLOCKED if lock is taken already, it WILL NOT WAIT when lock will be released,
> it just return some error in this case.
>
> I think it is correct.
> Do you think I am wrong or maybe I missed something?
>
> Thank you,
> Vasily Averin
>
> However I noticed now that past is incorrect,
> temporally dropped FL_SLEEP should be restored back in _nfs4_proc_setlk before _nfs4_do_setlk() call.
> I'll fix it in next version of this patch-set.
>
>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215383
>>> Signed-off-by: Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 5 ++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>>> index ee3bc79f6ca3..9b1380c4223c 100644
>>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>>> @@ -7094,7 +7094,7 @@ static int _nfs4_do_setlk(struct nfs4_state *state, int cmd, struct file_lock *f
>>> recovery_type == NFS_LOCK_NEW ? GFP_KERNEL : GFP_NOFS);
>>> if (data == NULL)
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>> - if (IS_SETLKW(cmd))
>>> + if (IS_SETLKW(cmd) || (fl->fl_flags & FL_SLEEP))
>>> data->arg.block = 1;
>>> nfs4_init_sequence(&data->arg.seq_args, &data->res.seq_res, 1,
>>> recovery_type > NFS_LOCK_NEW);
>>> @@ -7200,6 +7200,9 @@ static int _nfs4_proc_setlk(struct nfs4_state *state, int cmd, struct file_lock
>>> int status;
>>>
>>> request->fl_flags |= FL_ACCESS;
>>> + if (((fl_flags & FL_SLEEP_POSIX) == FL_SLEEP_POSIX) && IS_SETLK(cmd))
>>> + request->fl_flags &= ~FL_SLEEP;
>>> +
>>> status = locks_lock_inode_wait(state->inode, request);
>>> if (status < 0)
>>> goto out;
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-16 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-27 10:45 [PATCH] nfs4: handle async processing of F_SETLK with FL_SLEEP Vasily Averin
2021-12-27 15:51 ` [PATCH v2] " Vasily Averin
2021-12-28 1:04 ` Vasily Averin
2021-12-29 8:24 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] nfs: local_lock: " Vasily Averin
2021-12-29 8:24 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] nfs4: " Vasily Averin
2022-01-03 19:40 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-01-16 12:25 ` Vasily Averin
2022-01-03 19:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2022-01-16 12:44 ` Vasily Averin
2022-01-16 18:28 ` Vasily Averin [this message]
2022-01-18 22:35 ` J. Bruce Fields
2021-12-29 8:24 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] nfs v2/3: nlmclnt_lock: " Vasily Averin
2021-12-27 17:58 ` [PATCH] nfs4: " kernel test robot
2022-01-06 10:37 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bb20d9ba-b529-c3ff-004d-75df74c0f9e6@virtuozzo.com \
--to=vvs@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=anna.schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=kernel@openvz.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).