FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Cluster Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-07-2008, 05:11 PM
Wendy Cheng
 
Default Fix problems relating to execution of files on GFS2

Steven Whitehouse wrote:

--- a/fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c
+++ b/fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c
@@ -113,8 +113,18 @@ static struct dentry *gfs2_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
if (inode && IS_ERR(inode))
return ERR_PTR(PTR_ERR(inode));

- if (inode)

+ if (inode) {
+ struct gfs2_glock *gl = GFS2_I(inode)->i_gl;
+ struct gfs2_holder gh;
+ int error;
+ error = gfs2_glock_nq_init(gl, LM_ST_SHARED, LM_FLAG_ANY, &gh);



ok, so this shared glock is now added *back*. As I recall, its removal
about one year ago had caused great grief in NFS portion of logic - had
to do a tedious work to make NFS work due to this change. Now, the logic
is reverted - has performance impact been measured (since it is a disk
read) ?


-- Wendy

+ if (error) {
+ iput(inode);
+ return ERR_PTR(error);
+ }
+ gfs2_glock_dq_uninit(&gh);
return d_splice_alias(inode, dentry);
+ }
d_add(dentry, inode);

return NULL;
 
Old 01-08-2008, 07:40 AM
Steven Whitehouse
 
Default Fix problems relating to execution of files on GFS2

Hi,

On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 13:11 -0500, Wendy Cheng wrote:
> Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > --- a/fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c
> > @@ -113,8 +113,18 @@ static struct dentry *gfs2_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> > if (inode && IS_ERR(inode))
> > return ERR_PTR(PTR_ERR(inode));
> >
> > - if (inode)
> > + if (inode) {
> > + struct gfs2_glock *gl = GFS2_I(inode)->i_gl;
> > + struct gfs2_holder gh;
> > + int error;
> > + error = gfs2_glock_nq_init(gl, LM_ST_SHARED, LM_FLAG_ANY, &gh);
> >
>
> ok, so this shared glock is now added *back*. As I recall, its removal
> about one year ago had caused great grief in NFS portion of logic - had
> to do a tedious work to make NFS work due to this change. Now, the logic
> is reverted - has performance impact been measured (since it is a disk
> read) ?
>
> -- Wendy

Well yes and no. Its not in the same place as before, its only in the
VFS lookup code and not in the GFS2 internal lookup code, and I really
didn't want to have to add it back here if it could at all be avoided,
but since there is no dcache revalidate in the initial lookup case it
seems we have no choice now

Some tests with postmark show no measurable difference in performance so
far, so maybe its not so bad. We still need to get to the point where we
can use lookup intents and solve the problem properly,

Steve.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:58 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org