[GEDI] [RH-nfs-ganesha] gfapi: possible approaches to get lk_owner support

Matt Benjamin mbenjami at redhat.com
Wed Oct 4 12:36:56 UTC 2017

Hi Soumya,

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Soumya Koduri <skoduri at redhat.com> wrote:

> As far as the locks are concerned, looks like when we close a fd, server
> expects us to pass on lkowner as well and it cleans up locks with only that
> lkowner. That way we are right now safe to use glfs_dup and set another
> lkowner on the duplicate glfd returned.
> But if in case in future there comes any requirement to close all the locks
> tied to an fd, then the locks taken on both the glfd's shall be lost.

I've been trying to understand this precise point in the discussion.
Are you describing the potential effect of holding POSIX fcntl locks
in the server (as opposed to OFD locks, which I'd hope it used now, if
it uses such locks at all!), or something else?

This discussion has been very closely tied to details of the
structures, sorry about the basic semantic questions.


> Thanks,
> Soumya
> [1] https://review.gluster.org/18429


Matt Benjamin
Red Hat, Inc.
315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103


tel.  734-821-5101
fax.  734-769-8938
cel.  734-216-5309

More information about the integration mailing list