All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@ics.muni.cz>
Cc: nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Subject: Re: Oops in NFSv4 server in 2.6.23.17
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:05:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080314200510.GL2119@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080314195303.GA4390@ics.muni.cz>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 08:53:03PM +0100, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 03:33:50PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > OK, yes, I think so.  Could you confirm whether this fixes it?
> 
> I will test it on Monday as I cannot reboot the machine right now.
> 
> Just a quick review - isn't the cache_get() call needed also on the line 185 in
> the same file?

Right before the first nfsd_setuser_and_check_port()?  I don't believe
so.

The way it works is: the rqst_exp_find() calls bump the reference count
on the export they return to us, as expected; so if we bail out after
that line 185, the exp_put() at "out:" drops that reference, as it
should, making fh_verify a no-op with respect to the reference count.

The only time we need a new reference is when we store that pointer in
the filehandle, around line 233, as that's what creates a long-lived
reference that will outlive the function.

The other cache_get() (in the "just rechecking" case) is there just to
balance out the final exp_put() so every code path can share the same
code at "out:".

I find that a little contorted.  So I'll go ahead and submit this small
patch to 2.6.25 and stable now (I have since managed to reproduce what I
believe is your bug, though my symptoms were a little different), and
then submit to 2.6.26 some cleanup which makes this more understandable,
and brings fh_verify() a little closer to the kernel's aesthetic of
small, minimally-indented functions.

That said, I'd definitely still appreciate your confirmation that this
fixes your bug, so thanks for offering to retest that Monday.

--b.

>  
> > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > index 1eb771d..3e6b3f4 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > @@ -232,6 +232,7 @@ fh_verify(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp, int type, int access)
> >  		fhp->fh_dentry = dentry;
> >  		fhp->fh_export = exp;
> >  		nfsd_nr_verified++;
> > +		cache_get(&exp->h);
> >  	} else {
> >  		/*
> >  		 * just rechecking permissions
> > @@ -241,6 +242,7 @@ fh_verify(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp, int type, int access)
> >  		dprintk("nfsd: fh_verify - just checking\n");
> >  		dentry = fhp->fh_dentry;
> >  		exp = fhp->fh_export;
> > +		cache_get(&exp->h);
> >  		/*
> >  		 * Set user creds for this exportpoint; necessary even
> >  		 * in the "just checking" case because this may be a
> > @@ -252,8 +254,6 @@ fh_verify(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp, int type, int access)
> >  		if (error)
> >  			goto out;
> >  	}
> > -	cache_get(&exp->h);
> > -
> >  
> >  	error = nfsd_mode_check(rqstp, dentry->d_inode->i_mode, type);
> >  	if (error)
> 
> -- 
> Lukáš Hejtmánek

  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-14 20:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-12 12:25 Oops in NFSv4 server in 2.6.23.17 Lukas Hejtmanek
2008-03-12 16:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-13 14:36   ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2008-03-14 18:14     ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-14 19:33       ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-14 19:53         ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2008-03-14 20:05           ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2008-03-14 23:37             ` [PATCH] nfsd: fix oops on access from high-numbered ports J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-14 23:42             ` Oops in NFSv4 server in 2.6.23.17 J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-16 23:19               ` Neil Brown
2008-03-19 22:32                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-03-20  2:31                   ` NeilBrown
2008-03-17  8:12             ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2008-03-17 13:15               ` J. Bruce Fields

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080314200510.GL2119@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=nfsv4@linux-nfs.org \
    --cc=xhejtman@ics.muni.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.