Pasi,
Early test results for 2.7.6 are looking good.
Thanks,
Vandana
On 7/18/19, 3:13 AM, "Pasi Kärkkäinen" <pasik(a)iki.fi> wrote:
Hello Rungta,
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 03:24:48PM +0000, Rungta, Vandana wrote:
The core I have in the message thread:
https://lists.nfs-ganesha.org/archives/list/devel@lists.nfs-ganesha.org/t...
was with 2.7.5 with the below change already applied. The core is very reproducible.
I'm curious if nfs-ganesha V2.7.6 works OK for you? Would be nice to know the test
results with that version.
Thanks,
-- Pasi
The window that is fixed by this change - does it also exist for the
case where we transition to the next chunk on the last line in mdcache_readdir_chunked.
Read_lock. The first chunk is populated, and we read the entries from that chunk. Then
we transition to the next chunk. The next chunk is not populated, he have a ref count on
the chunk, and we continue to hold the ref across the lock drop.
Thanks,
Vandana
if (look_ck == 0 ||
!mdcache_avl_lookup_ck(directory, look_ck, &dirent)) {
fsal_status_t status;
/* This starting position isn't in our cache...
* Go populate the cache and process from there.
*/
if (!has_write) {
/* Upgrade to write lock and retry just in case
* another thread managed to populate this cookie
* in the meantime.
*/
PTHREAD_RWLOCK_unlock(&directory->content_lock);
PTHREAD_RWLOCK_wrlock(&directory->content_lock);
has_write = true;
/* We have a ref on chunk; don't null it out */
goto again;
}
???On 7/11/19, 8:09 AM, "Daniel Gryniewicz" <dang(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Okay, this is a simple fix. It should not, in fact, be holding a ref
across the lock drop, since we are throwing that chunk away anyway. The
unref was in the wrong location.
https://review.gerrithub.io/c/ffilz/nfs-ganesha/+/461446
Daniel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.nfs-ganesha.org