Design change for oplock/open code?
Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Fri Apr 26 09:38:50 MDT 2013
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 01:39:20PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > Attached find a patch that is NOT for upstream yet, but what
> > I would like to receive some comments for.
> > It changes our oplock and open retry handling logic. The
> > first of the patches adds a dbwrap_record_watch_send when we
> > defer an open. For those who haven't seen this API yet: It
> > calls us back whenever a record we're interested in changes.
> > It is right now used in the g_lock implementation for
> > persistent ctdb transactions as well as the smb2 session
> > reconnect code.
> > With current code, for oplock breaks we rely on the code
> > that handles the client oplock break to get back to us when
> > the oplock break is done. Likewise for the SHARING_VIOLATION
> > retry when a file is closed. The new code will retry the
> > open whenever the locking.tdb record changes, independently
> > from the oplock breaker or conflicting share mode holder. It
> > might lead to some false wakeups, because someone unrelated
> > modifies the record, but I right now I can't think of a
> > scenario where this could become a problem.
> > Two nice aspects: First, the patchset just survived an
> > autobuild. Second, it has the potential to decouple
> > responsibilities and remove quite some code, simplifying our
> > oplock implentation somewhat.
> > Comments?
> Oooh. I really like this. Please develop further :-).
find a patchset that I see as complete for upstream. The
nice thing is the overall diff:
17 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 434 deletions(-)
Please review & push if okay.
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de
More information about the samba-technical