- 08 7月, 2005 3 次提交
-
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
After discussion at the recent NFSv4 bake-a-thon, I realized that my assumption that NFS4_FH_PERSISTENT required filehandles to persist was a misreading of the spec. This also fixes an interoperability problem with the Solaris client. Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
Add some comments on the use of so_seqid, in an attempt to avoid some of the confusion outlined in the previous patch.... Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
The sequence number we store in the sequence id is the last one we received from the client. So on the next operation we'll check that the client gives us the next higher number. We increment sequence id's at the last moment, in encode, so that we're sure of knowing the right error return. (The decision to increment the sequence id depends on the exact error returned.) However on the *first* use of a sequence number, if we set the sequence number to the one received from the client and then let the increment happen on encode, we'll be left with a sequence number one to high. For that reason, ENCODE_SEQID_OP_TAIL only increments the sequence id on *confirmed* stateowners. This creates a problem for open reclaims, which are confirmed on first use. Therefore the open reclaim code, as a special exception, *decrements* the sequence id, cancelling out the undesired increment on encode. But this prevents the sequence id from ever being incremented in the case where multiple reclaims are sent with the same openowner. Yuch! We could add another exception to the open reclaim code, decrementing the sequence id only if this is the first use of the open owner. But it's simpler by far to modify the meaning of the op_seqid field: instead of representing the previous value sent by the client, we take op_seqid, after encoding, to represent the *next* sequence id that we expect from the client. This eliminates the need for special-case handling of the first use of a stateowner. Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
- 24 6月, 2005 3 次提交
-
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
This patch contains the following possible cleanups: - make needlessly global code static Signed-off-by: NAdrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
Allow recovery of delegations after reboot. Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
由 NeilBrown 提交于
We're returning NFS4_FH_NOEXPIRE_WITH_OPEN | NFS4_FH_VOL_RENAME for the fh_expire_type attribute. This is incorrect: 1. The spec actually only allows NOEXPIRE_WITH_OPEN when VOLATILE_ANY is also set. 2. Filehandles for open files can expire, if the file is removed and there is a reboot. 3. Filehandles are only volatile on rename in the nosubtree check case. Unfortunately, there's no way to indicate that we only expire on remove. So our only choice is FH4_VOLATILE_ANY. Although it's redundant, we also set FH4_VOL_RENAME in the subtree check case, since subtreecheck does actually cause problems in practice and it seems possibly useful to give clients some way to distinguish that case. Fix a mispelled #define while we're at it. Signed-off-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu> Signed-off-by: NNeil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au> Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
-
- 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
-
-
由 Linus Torvalds 提交于
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history, even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about 3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good infrastructure for it. Let it rip!
-