All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
Cc: Frank van Maarseveen <frankvm@frankvm.com>,
	Linux NFS mailing list <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [NLM] 2.6.27 broken
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:33:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090204233348.GD20917@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081216201610.GE18928@fieldses.org>

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 03:16:10PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 08:43:52PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 12:39 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > More precisely, it looks like this started with
> > > 
> > > 	bde74e4bc64415b142e "locks: add special return value for
> > > 		asynchronous locks"
> > > 
> > > But I haven't had the chance to look any harder yet.  Miklos?  Is this
> > > easy for you to reproduce?
> > 
> > Not immediately, at the moment I don't have NFS set up.  But if you
> > don't beat me to it, I'll look into this.
> 
> OK, thanks.  I'll take another look too when I get the chance, so let me
> know of any partial result.
> 
> It may just for example be returning the wrong error to the client on an
> nlm blocking lock request, so that the client assumes the lock is gone
> and goes away rather than waiting for a grant request.

Sorry, I've gotten a bit backlogged, but I finally got back to this.  If
there's no objections, the following is what I intend to submit.

--b.

commit cb8b864ea6addd3a3e72fe835aafecec63f06cbd
Author: J. Bruce Fields <bfields-+qGSg9AQ1cLTsXDwO4sDpg@public.gmane.org>
Date:   Wed Feb 4 17:35:38 2009 -0500

    lockd: fix regression in lockd's handling of blocked locks
    
    If a client requests a blocking lock, is denied, then requests it again,
    then here in nlmsvc_lock() we will call vfs_lock_file() without FL_SLEEP
    set, because we've already queued a block and don't need the locks code
    to do it again.
    
    But that means vfs_lock_file() will return -EAGAIN instead of
    FILE_LOCK_DENIED.  So we still need to translate that -EAGAIN return
    into a nlm_lck_blocked error in this case, and put ourselves back on
    lockd's block list.
    
    The bug was introduced by bde74e4bc64415b1 "locks: add special return
    value for asynchronous locks".
    
    Thanks to From: Frank van Maarseveen for the report; his original test
    case was essentially
    
    	for i in `seq 30`; do flock /nfsmount/foo sleep 10 & done
    
    Cc: Frank van Maarseveen <frankvm@frankvm.com>
    Cc: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
    Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>

diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
index 6063a8e..763b78a 100644
--- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c
+++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
@@ -427,7 +427,7 @@ nlmsvc_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_file *file,
 			goto out;
 		case -EAGAIN:
 			ret = nlm_lck_denied;
-			goto out;
+			break;
 		case FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED:
 			if (wait)
 				break;
@@ -443,6 +443,10 @@ nlmsvc_lock(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct nlm_file *file,
 			goto out;
 	}
 
+	ret = nlm_lck_denied;
+	if (!wait)
+		goto out;
+
 	ret = nlm_lck_blocked;
 
 	/* Append to list of blocked */

  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-04 23:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-15 13:28 [NLM] 2.6.27 broken Frank van Maarseveen
2008-11-20 22:27 ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-11-28 11:24   ` Frank van Maarseveen
2008-12-16 17:39     ` J. Bruce Fields
2008-12-16 19:43       ` Miklos Szeredi
2008-12-16 20:16         ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-04 23:33           ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2009-02-05 10:21             ` Frank van Maarseveen
2009-02-05 19:52               ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-05 10:47             ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-05 19:52               ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-06 11:29                 ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-09 18:10                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-02-09 20:18                     ` Miklos Szeredi
2009-02-09 20:51                       ` 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=20090204233348.GD20917@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=frankvm@frankvm.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mszeredi@suse.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.