All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Rob Gardner <rob.gardner@hp.com>
Cc: tmtalpey@gmail.com,
	"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Huge race in lockd for async lock requests?
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 16:05:23 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090528200523.GE13860@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A1431B1.6080708@hp.com>

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:37:05AM -0600, Rob Gardner wrote:
> Tom Talpey wrote:
>> At 02:55 AM 5/20/2009, Rob Gardner wrote:
>>   
>>> Tom Talpey wrote:
>>>     
>>>> At 04:43 PM 5/19/2009, Rob Gardner wrote:
>>>>       
>>>>> I've got a question about lockd in conjunction with a filesystem 
>>>>> that provides its own (async) locking.
>>>>>
>>>>> After nlmsvc_lock() calls vfs_lock_file(), it seems to be that we 
>>>>> might get the async callback (nlmsvc_grant_deferred) at any time. 
>>>>> What's to stop it from arriving before we even put the block on 
>>>>> the nlm_block list? If this happens, then nlmsvc_grant_deferred() 
>>>>> will print "grant for unknown block" and then we'll wait forever 
>>>>> for a grant that will never come.
>>>>>         
>>>> Yes, there's a race but the client will retry every 30 seconds, so it won't
>>>> wait forever.
>>>>       
>>> OK, a blocking lock request will get retried in 30 seconds and work 
>>> out "ok". But a non-blocking request will get in big trouble. Let's 
>>> say the     
>>
>> A non-blocking lock doesn't request, and won't get, a callback. So I
>> don't understand...
>>
>>   
>
> What do you mean a non-blocking lock doesn't request? Remember that I'm  
> dealing with a filesystem that provides its own locking functions via  
> file->f_op->lock(). Such a filesystem might easily defer a non-blocking  
> lock request and invoke the callback later. At least I don't know of any  
> rule that says that it can't do this, and clearly the code expects this  
> possibility:
>
>              case FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED:
>                        if (wait)
>                                break;
>                        /* Filesystem lock operation is in progress
>                           Add it to the queue waiting for callback */
>                        ret = nlmsvc_defer_lock_rqst(rqstp, block);
>
>
>>> callback is invoked immediately after the vfs_lock_file call returns  
>>> FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED. At this point, the block is not on the nlm_block  
>>> list, so the callback routine will not be able to find it and mark it 
>>> as granted. Then nlmsvc_lock() will call nlmsvc_defer_lock_rqst(), 
>>> put the block on the nlm_block list, and eventually the request will 
>>> timeout and the client will get lck_denied. Meanwhile, the lock has 
>>> actually been granted, but nobody knows about it.
>>>     
>>
>> Yes, this can happen, I've seen it too. Again, it's a bug in the protocol
>> more than a bug in the clients. 
> It looks to me like a bug in the server. The server must be able to deal  
> with async filesystem callbacks happening at any time, however 
> inconvenient.

Absolutely, if that's possible then it's a server bug.

--b.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-28 20:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-15 14:48 Virtual IPs and blocking locks Sachin S. Prabhu
2009-05-15 16:50 ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-18 13:41   ` Sachin S. Prabhu
2009-05-18 13:46     ` Trond Myklebust
2009-05-18 13:55     ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-19 20:43       ` Huge race in lockd for async lock requests? Rob Gardner
2009-05-19 21:33         ` Tom Talpey
2009-05-20  6:55         ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-20 14:00           ` Tom Talpey
     [not found]             ` <4a140d0a.85c2f10a.53bc.0979-ATjtLOhZ0NVl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-20 14:14               ` Tom Talpey
     [not found]                 ` <4a14106e.48c3f10a.7ce3.0e55-ATjtLOhZ0NVl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-20 23:20                   ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-20 16:37               ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-28 20:05                 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2009-05-28 21:34                   ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-29  0:26                     ` J. Bruce Fields
2009-05-29  2:59                       ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-29 13:22                         ` Tom Talpey
     [not found]                           ` <4a1fe1c0.06045a0a.165b.5fbc-ATjtLOhZ0NVl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-29 15:24                             ` Rob Gardner
2009-05-29 19:14                               ` 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=20090528200523.GE13860@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rob.gardner@hp.com \
    --cc=tmtalpey@gmail.com \
    /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.