Re: [PATCH 0/4] 2.6.21-rc7 NFS writes: fix a series of issues

[Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>]

On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:19:46 -0400 Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I've split the issues introduced by the 2.6.21-rcX write code up into 4
> > subproblems.
> > 
> > The first patch is just a cleanup in order to ease review.
> > 
> > Patch number 2 ensures that we never release the PG_writeback flag until
> > _after_ we've either discarded the unstable request altogether, or put it
> > on the nfs_inode's commit or dirty lists.
> > 
> > Patch number 3 fixes the 'desynchronized value of nfs_i.ncommit' error. It
> > uses the PG_NEED_COMMIT flag as an indicator for whether or not the request
> > may be redirtied.
> > 
> > Patch number 4 protects the NFS '.set_page_dirty' address_space operation
> > against races with nfs_inode_add_request.
> 
> For 2.6.21, yes?

Right. A couple of nasty regressions have been sighted. This series
attempts to deal with them all.

> I diligently tried to review this code but alas, it seems that my NFS
> knowledge remains not up to the task.  Please avoid buses.
> 
> At least it compiles with all the configs I could think of ;)

I was mainly interested in feedback from Peter, Florin and Ogawa-san to
find out if this series fixes their problems. You were unfortunate
enough to have been on earlier Ccs, so I didn't dare trim you off. :-)

Cheers
  Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/