Lustre devel - Feb 2007 - [Bug 11300] Interval trees for scalable extent lock handling

Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by
using the following link:
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11300



Created an attachment (id=9523)
Please don''t reply to lustre-devel. Instead, comment in Bugzilla by
using the following link:
 --> (https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=9523&action=view)
DLD revision2

fixed defects from vitaly''s inspection.
in addition:
1. for defect 4: 
>have a look at @conflicing variable and its logic.
>it is completely skipped in your dld: you have to get @conflicting
>from ldlm_extent_lock_policy or explain how this logic will be changed.
seems "conflicting" variable is mostly used for waiting list; for
original
granted list case, because new_ex.start = 0 and new_ex.end = EOF, so
"conflicting" variable need to be taken care of; but for current case,
we can
reassign new_ex to  req->l_req_extent, then we no longer need to care of
"conflicting" now
2. policy list maintainment
in bug10902, @l_sl_policy is implemented as a not cycle list, so for extent
interval tree case, we accept this and will not use any list_*() anymore.